Dem Blue Dogs pledging their support to GOPer McConnell on expanded spying

[Robbien]

Director of National Intelligence (DNI) Michael McConnell has quietly courted key members of the House Blue Dog Coalition for a short-term fix for the administration’s foreign-intelligence surveillance program, putting additional pressure on Democratic leaders to pass a bill before the end of the week.

Republicans have recently hammered Democrats for failing to pass promptly an emergency overhaul of the law governing electronic surveillance. Republicans have cited new evidence that terrorists are planning attacks on domestic soil, although the administration has not raised the terrorist threat alert level recently.

. . .

The GOP criticism didn’t stop after Democrats announced in the afternoon that they hoped to get a bill to President Bush’s desk before the August recess. . .

McConnell’s office, however, started reaching out to Blue Dogs before negotiations intensified in an attempt to help leverage the Democratic Caucus. Rep. Bud Cramer (D-Ala.), a member of the Intelligence Committee, said over the weekend McConnell asked him to organize a Blue Dog meeting, which was held on Tuesday in a secure location. The DNI’s office also reached out to Rep. Jane Harman (D-Calif.), the former ranking member of the Intelligence panel who now chairs the intelligence subcommittee on the Homeland Security Committee. Pelosi denied her the top spot on Intelligence last winter.
. . .

On Wednesday, 33 of 47 Blue Dogs signed a letter to McConnell expressing their desire to pass an overhaul before the end of the week.

“We share your concern about the need for surveilling all foreign-to-foreign communications involving suspected terrorists, and believe Congress should act before we recess to clarify your authority to do this. ... We intend to communicate our views promptly to House leadership,” they wrote.

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/spy-chief-courts-blue-dogs-for-fisa-law-overhaul-2007-08-02.html

GOPers want to remove this process from FISA court and give it over to Gonzo. So far that is how the compromise bill is written. Leahy is saying no, but GOPers/Blue Dogs are pushing hard.

[aquart]

1. Blue dogs yelping? Bite 'em.

[Mythsaje]

2. Ummm...

"all foreign-to-foreign communications involving suspected terrorists..."

And this would be a problem under FISA, why?

[mmonk]

16. Because it doesn't allow for a dictatorship in the U.S..

[Mythsaje]

40. Bingo...

Time to become even MORE annoying.

[Horse with no Name]

3. List of Blue Dogs

* Mike Arcuri (New York)
* Joe Baca (California)
* John Barrow (Georgia)
* Melissa Bean (Illinois)
* Marion Berry (Arkansas)
* Sanford Bishop (Georgia)
* Dan Boren (Oklahoma)
* Leonard Boswell (Iowa)
* Allen Boyd (Florida), Blue Dog Co-Chair for Administration
* Dennis Cardoza (California)
* Christopher Carney (Pennsylvania)
* Ben Chandler (Kentucky)
* Jim Cooper (Tennessee)
* Jim Costa (California)
* Bud Cramer (Alabama)
* Lincoln Davis (Tennessee)
* Joe Donnelly (Indiana)
* Brad Ellsworth (Indiana)
* Gabrielle Giffords (Arizona)
* Kirsten Gillibrand (New York)
* Bart Gordon (Tennessee)
* Jane Harman (California)
* Stephanie Herseth Sandlin (South Dakota), Blue Dog Whip
* Baron Hill (Indiana)
* Tim Holden (Pennsylvania)
* Steve Israel (New York)
* Nick Lampson (Texas)
* Tim Mahoney (Florida)
* Jim Marshall (Georgia)
* Jim Matheson (Utah)
* Mike McIntyre (North Carolina)
* Charlie Melancon (Louisiana)
* Mike Michaud (Maine)
* Dennis Moore (Kansas), Blue Dog Co-Chair for Policy
* Patrick Murphy (Pennsylvania)
* Collin Peterson (Minnesota)
* Earl Pomeroy (North Dakota)
* Mike Ross (Arkansas), Blue Dog Co-Chair for Communications
* John Salazar (Colorado)
* Loretta Sanchez (California)
* Adam Schiff (California)
* David Scott (Georgia)
* Heath Shuler (North Carolina)
* Zack Space (Ohio)
* John Tanner (Tennessee)
* Gene Taylor (Mississippi)
* Mike Thompson (California)
* Charlie Wilson (Ohio)

[salin]

6. about a third of the bluedogs have not pledged support

I hope that the hoosiers on the list are part of the 14 NOT going along.

[Robbien]

8. Thanks for the roster

Going to the Blue Dog site is of no help in identifying who is and is not a Blue Dog.

Bookmarked

[Horse with no Name]

9. It's basically what constitutes our majority

which tells us that we are undeniably fucked.

[Freddie Stubbs]

12. Would you have preferred less Blue Dogs and no majority?

:shrug:

[Robbien]

14. Oh sure, we've done so much with this majority of ours

More spying powers Georgie. Sure fine. We of the majority party will hop to it and fast as a bunny give you more power.

With the Blue Dogs joining with GOPers 98% of the time signing letters of support to GOPers, there is no Democratic majority. Democrats now get the blame for everything while traitors inside the party are playing footsie with GOPers.

[Freddie Stubbs]

19. How exactly did you arrive at that 98% figure?

Did a majority of Blue Dogs oppose the increase in the minimum wage?

Did a majority of Blue Dogs oppose implementing the 9/11 Commission's recommendations?

Did a majority of Blue Dogs oppose cutting student loan rates?

Not only did Blue Dogs support these initiatives, they provided the majority necessary to bring them to the floor for a vote. Previous Republican Congresses kept these bills from being voted on.

[Horse with no Name]

22. I get it. You're a Blue Dog.

:eyes:

[Freddie Stubbs]

25. I'm a realist

;)

[Horse with no Name]

26. Fuck that.

:rofl:

[Robbien]

36. Oh bullshit

Right now, as this article states, your Blue Dogs are going off in secret undisclosed locations with GOPers to work out a plan to give Bush more power.

Every time someone complains that Blue Dogs are traitors to the party one of you brings out a very short list of bills the Blue Dogs snootily said okay you dumb Dems we will vote with you for a change on this one, BUT YOU THEN OWE US, WE GAVE YOU THE MAJORITY.

Blue Dogs meeting up with GOPers in secret behind closed doors strategy meetings. Hey, do your Blue Dogs also go to the weekly GOPer meetings and pass along to their very best GOPer friends all the inside scoop of what the Democratic strategy is and how best to bring it down? I wouldn't put it past them.

[butterfly77]

41. The problem with them is..

that they vote with the CONS at the most critical times. Now is not the time for the phony bipartisanship.

[Horse with no Name]

15. What good are hearings

with no results of those hearings?
What good is the rule of law if you don't enforce it?
What good are Constitutional remedies when they refuse to put them on the table? (impeachment, censure, inherent contempt)
What good is legislation that can't get out of Congress?
What good is a majority that is unable to do ANYTHING?
What good are Democratic legislators that DENY support to Democratic values and uphold Republican values?
So yes, I would prefer REAL Democrats in those seats as opposed to these shitheads who are no better than the republicans who sat in those seats previous.

[Freddie Stubbs]

17. Would the minimum wage have been increased with a Republican majority?

:shrug:

[Horse with no Name]

18. Is that all we are hanging our hats on?

Because that isn't really a raise.
Oil and energy companies are continuing to rape us (where are the investigations on THAT)?
Perhaps the investigations were traded for throwing a few more cents at the most vulnerable in society, although with the gouged oil and electric prices nobody will ever realize that they even got a raise.

[Freddie Stubbs]

20. So, you would have preferred the minimum wage to stay as it was in exchange for

less Blue Dogs?

[Horse with no Name]

21. No. I would have preferred REAL Democrats be elected.

Why is that so hard to understand?

[Freddie Stubbs]

24. Your 'Real' Democrats are imaginary

Blue Dogs are usually from rural, conservative districts. Those districts will either elect Republicans or moderate Democrats. Which would you prefer?

[Horse with no Name]

27. I PREFER REAL DEMOCRATS WITH REAL DEMOCRATIC VALUES

A dog by any other color is a Republican.

[onenote]

32. do you prefer Lamar Smith over John Conyers?

Because that's what you'll get as Chairman of the Judiciary Committee if Blue Dogs are defeated by repubs. You might not think that they're "real Democrats" but when it comes to organizing the House, electing a speaker, naming committee chairs, they side with the Democrats.

[Freddie Stubbs]

35. Apperently the Democrats in the districts which elected these Blue Dogs

have values which may differ from your values. But that is how our system works. The voters of each district gets to choose their represetnative.

[orleans]

39. the only good blue dog is the one painted by ellen booth:

[in_cog_ni_to]

49. LOL...couldn't agree more!

:rofl:

[mmonk]

28. If it makes no difference

in protecting our liberties and the constitution, what does it matter? I prefer truth in advertising, because I usually try to support a democrat or two each election outside of my district. If they are my political enemy, I prefer to know.

[Freddie Stubbs]

34. Truth in advertising? What specific campaign promises have these Blue Dogs broken?

How many of them campainged on a platform of not giving the President more power?

[mmonk]

38. So what's your position on democrats giving

extraconstitutional power to a rogue republican president? Some of us expect more from someone with a D beside their name.

[Major Hogwash]

23. So, basically it is this cabal within the Democratic party that has kept things botched up?

In your opinion?

My heart just fell to my stomach.
I sent money to support Stephanie Herseth even though she wasn't in my district.

[Horse with no Name]

29. I think they are the obstructionists within our party

Between them and the DLC'ers, they have a lock on our party and they support the republicans.

[Major Hogwash]

44. I appreciate your reply and I tend to agree with you.

I have no idea how this came to be, but it heartsickening to witness all the little cliques attempting their "power grab" during a war while good people are being killed in Iraq.

[Le Taz Hot]

33. Ah, hell!

Mine is on there (Costa). The little shit! Well, I know what I'm doing at least part of the day.

On edit: He's not actually mine but he's the closest Democrat I have. Contacting my congresscritter (Radanovich) is absolutely a waste of time. I just tried to e-mail Costa but because I am outside of his district he won't accept my e-mail. That's OK, they'll accept my phone call.

[hfojvt]

37. Hey Stephanie got married!

Herseth that is :cry: Now Herseth-Sandlin :toast:

That's my home state, so I still follow it a little. Often too red. Which makes me think. Why is this coalition BLUE dogs when they lean red? Shouldn't they be RED dogs? Then they'd have their own beer too.

Also, I note Boyda's not on the list, although I heard she was joining. I was hoping she wouldn't follow Dennis Moore's lead because I really don't like him ever since he ran for re-election in 2002 touting the fact that he voted for the Bush tax cuts. :puke:

[madfloridian]

45. Are they same howling blue dogs who sold us out on the bankruptcy bill?

Along with the New Dems?

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/madfloridian/699

Oh, yes, those Blue Dogs.

That bill that is so devastating to families in financial trouble because of medical bills.

[Vidar]

4. All the little Liebermans are going home to roost.

[Horse with no Name]

5. And the folks who said all we need to do is elect someone with a "D" behind their name

Well that isn't working out so well for us...
and it makes me wonder if THIS particular caucus is the thorn in her side on impeachment.

Between the Blue Dogs and the DLC--we don't REALLY have a majority.
>>>snip
Differences between the Blue Dogs and the Democratic Leadership Council

The differences between the Blue Dogs, and the other prominent coalition of moderate Democrats, the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC), are sometimes subtle. The DLC describes itself as new Democrat and positions itself as centrist while taking moderate or liberal positions on social issues and moderate positions on economic issues and trade. The DLC views the support of free trade as a traditionally liberal position, and similarly frames their support of an aggressive national defense as historically a Democratic Party position. Thus, despite several differences with modern liberals and progressives, most remain unabashedly partisan Democrats, with less of a tendency than the Blue Dogs to form coalitions across party lines. The two emphasize different goals; the DLC aims to revitalize and strengthen the Democratic party, while the Blue Dogs prefer to emphasize bipartisanship.

Democrats who identify with the Blue Dogs tend to be fiscal conservatives, but have more divergent positions on social issues than the DLC. Reflecting the group's Southern roots, many are strong supporters of gun rights and get high ratings from the National Rifle Association, some have pro-life voting records, and some get high ratings from immigration reduction groups. As a caucus, however, the group has never agreed on or taken a position on these issues, and many members favor more socially liberal positions.

On economic issues, Blue Dogs tend to be pro-business and favor limiting public welfare spending, arguing instead for "individual responsibility". They have supported welfare reform, for example, as well as the Republican backed Bankruptcy Reform Act of 2005. They do, however, have differing positions on trade issues, including some supporters of labor unions, protectionism, and other populist measures, while the DLC tends to favor free trade.

A small number of newer Blue Dogs hold positions closer to those of the DLC, and some Blue Dog Coalition members are also DLC members. Blue Dogs share with the DLC a desire to keep the Democratic Party grounded in their view of the political center and to ensure that the party does not drift too far to the left of their own positions and no longer appeal to what they believe to be the majority of U.S. voters.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Dog_Democrats

[onenote]

7. Thus proving the point, one would hope, about the problems of "impeach now"

If only half of the Blue Dogs that signed the letter to McConnell voted against an impeachment resolution in the House, that resolution would fail. Pelosi can count and she knows where these folks stand.

[mmonk]

13. I'm for impeachment

and I'm aware the bluedogs are the problem. I however, think the heat should be turned up on them. Not moving and putting pressure on them gives them the victory they seek at protecting bush/Cheney.

[onenote]

31. and how do you propose to "put heat" on them?

I suspect that most if not all Blue Dogs are from red-leaning districts where there is not nearly the level of enthusiasm for impeachment you would find on DU (or in places like San Francisco). Progressives in these districts can threaten to withhold support, but the almost certain result would be the election of a repub in place of the Blue Dog. Accomplish that feat enough times and you have Denny Hastert as Speaker and Lamar Smith as chairman of the Judiciary.

The Blue Dogs may come around, but only when a few repubs start abandoning ship as well.

[butterfly77]

42. Why aren't people hitting in these areas with information...

[mmonk]

43. I'm in a purple state

where real live information that officials are destroying constitutional government would make it harder for them to sell Americans out. I do not care for moles nor accept their excuses for supporting bush/Cheney.

[mmonk]

10. It must never go to the executive branch.

I know blue dogs are fascinated with rightwing dictatorships and war but this must never happen.

[Hubert Flottz]

11. The Blue Sheep democan'ts are letting the GOPers stampede

them again. Didn't they learn ANYTHING from the abuse of the "Patriot Acts" I & II?

[Nickster]

30. Do we have a list of which Blue Dogs signed on to this letter? I know it's crazy, I should just

assume that my Blue Dog is on that list, but I keep hoping. *sigh*

[madfloridian]

46. These Blue Dogs? Did the New Dems join them?

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/madfloridian/1178

They are going to sell us out again.

[in_cog_ni_to]

47. Go ahead and flame me, I really don't give a shit, but THIS IS WHY WE DON'T WANT THESE PEOPLE IN OUR

PARTY!!!!! Sensible Center? MY ASS! DINO is more like it. They do the DEMOCRATIC PARTY no good. NONE whatsoever. Fuckers.

[brentspeak]

48. Not all the blue dogs are for this

[BlooInBloo]

50. Primary challenge, anyone?