AMERICAblog: AG Holder might appoint criminal prosecutor to investigate torture. Obama's political aides are against that.
shell
· 4 months ago
Isn't that the whole point of an Attorney General? They are supposed to be separate from the White House? I am not a lawyer, but I do have a memory. And I remember the Nixon investigation quite well.
Is anyone old enough to remember "The Saturday Night Massacre?" Nixon kept firing those who wanted to investigate him. And the congress had to step in. Ah, if we only had brave congressmen now -- or a brave president. Either one would be nice.
JWSwift
· 4 months ago
Funny: supposedly Obama's administration couldn't do anything about the awful DOMA brief because of the separation of powers, yet they want to influence Holder's department over this issue?
Which is it, Obama, separate or not?
sonofloud
· 4 months ago
For Obama, that depends on the issue.
Bill_Perdue
· 4 months ago
It's unlikely that Obama will prosecute the Bush Administration for torture, rendition, running a concentration camp, interfering with civil liberties at home or conducting a war of genocide for oil.
The first reason is named Bill Clinton. He authorized rendition (kidnapping), extreme rendition (kidnap/murder) and torture of political and military enemies as early as 1995. A year or so later he authored the embargo of medical supplies, food and sanitary supplies that murdered roughly half a million Iraqi children. Clintons Secretary of State Madeleine Albright thought it was a good plan in spite of the dead kids and babies.
On "60 Minutes" on May 12, 1996 Lesley Stahl asked Albright
“We have heard that a half million children have died. I mean, that's more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price worth it?” Albright replied “I think this is a very hard choice, but the price - we think the price is worth it.”
The second reason is named Barak Obama. He’s continuing the occupation of Iraq and escalating US state terrorist violence against civilians in Afghanistan and Pakistan. He’s continuing rendition as long as it done outside of the US. He supported the FISA bill to excuse Bush’s widespread wiretapping. And etc.
If they go after Bush they’d be embarrassed for not going after Clinton and Obama.
Rufus
· 4 months ago
One more comment: Republicans are saying if you investigate Bush, all past presidents would have to be investigated. I say do it. Clinton, Bush I, Reagan, Carter, Ford, Nixon, LBJ, JFK, Ike, Truman, FDR, etc., etc. (even James Polk). If they did bad, sock it to 'em. But, let's do King Bush II first.
triple7s
· 4 months ago
Laws, have not as rule, been applied to politicians as they are to other citizens of the United States. My sense is that this investigation, as ones in the past, won't go anywhere. We can rest knowing the double standard still applies.
Butch1
· 4 months ago
" ...run counter to President Obama's oft-repeated desire to be "looking forward and not backwards..." ====================================
Obama needs to learn that unresolved problems from the past will impede the "looking forward". He is so willing to not procecute crimes from the Bush era he will interfere. He needs to get out of the way of this decision. It makes me wonder why he is so protective of the Bush administration now when he was so against their lack of vision and management skills and out right breaking of the law when he was running for office. Does the rhetoric on the campaign trail have to be all lies?
As noisy as Cheney was last month, with all his program appearances, he couldn't be found to comment on this latest news that he may be brought up on charges. Now he's decided to get smart and shut his mouth before he incriminates himself further.
Dateline_Molly
· 4 months ago
Obama was probably briefed that if he released these Gitmo detainees and we actually had another terra attack during his presidency, and it was discovered one of these detainees was somehow involved, he would lose his run in 2012. (Or the news organizations "spun it" that released detainees were involved.) There's no question he'd be political toast.
So he is not only disavowing any need for investigations, he is piling even more egregious policies ON TOP OF what Bush already did.
Political expediency. Barry is all about Barry. His glorious political career trumps the rule of law.
That and complicit Dems who know their asses are on the line with any investigation, too.
Butch1
· 4 months ago
" Barry is all about Barry. His glorious political career trumps the rule of law." ===================================== It's looking more and more like that is the "prime objective." A progressive third party perhaps, or running someone against Obama?!!
shell
· 4 months ago
Sadly, the only decent ones cannot win.
Butch1
· 4 months ago
Agreed. Perhaps, starting sooner and letting the progressives of the democratic party get used to someone who actually is liberal might help. We all bought into the Obama myth and I think there will be enough people from the base to actually create a stir in the democratic party. They are smug presently, but we can wipe that smirk off their faces if they see the threat of either having a third party pulling their base away from them along with some disappointed moderates or get behind and support a real liberal democrat and make sure his or her numbers are significant to get these democrats in-charge of this deception to start looking over their shoulders. Nothing is going to change until the money they are expecting dries up and goes to another cantidate of our choice.
shell
· 4 months ago
Good plan. One race I am going to be watching very closely is Arlen Specter's race next year. I don't know much about Sustack, but he HAS to be better than the GOPer. Already, Arlen has started lying about him.
But what REALLY gets me steaming mad is that both the State gov and Obama (and presumably most Senate Dems) are 100% behind Arlen. 2006 all over again (Holy Joe).
We HAVE to stop this. The PA gov even smirked and said to Sustack, "It is OK for you to run for reelection in the House, but NOT run for the Senate." WHAT? Who does he think he is????
Butch1
· 4 months ago
"But what REALLY gets me steaming mad is that both the State gov and Obama (and presumably most Senate Dems) are 100% behind Arlen. 2006 all over again (Holy Joe)." =========================== The democratic party needs to be run by the people. We need to tell them who we want running. Since they are commited to backing Spector, who in my opinion, is still a republican, then all the democratic money in the state and else where needs to go against him. I'm tired of them selecting who we should vote for and not ourselves making that decision.
Montiel
· 4 months ago
"...might spawn partisan debates..."
Cheaper words were never spoken.
osage
· 4 months ago
If Holder DOESN'T name an independent investigator, then we will know that it's politics as usual in the Obama administration, and that while he is certainly a much, much better option than George W. Bush, Obama is still more a political animal than a morally/ethically principled one. Especially after his campaign promise to eliminate political influence in DOJ decisions.
Butch1
· 4 months ago
The last thing Holder wants to be called is Gonzalas.
cowboyneok
· 4 months ago
I hope Holder beats down the "political types" who have forgotten what our country is supposed to stand for.
TheOriginalLiz
· 4 months ago
Obama is owned by the same cabal that every other politician in the country is owned by. Any apparent differences have been manufactured to keep people happy, feeling they have actually voted for change. I don't think we're going to see any significant change from the Obama years, just a lot of talk. Now, granted, the talk will be more articulate than that of the previous administration...
barkleyg
· 4 months ago
Holder going after the Bush/Cheney Crime Family is the proper way to do it. If I remember my constitution correctly, the DOJ is the Government's Lawyer; the DOJ is NOT the President's Lawyer,
Before the Bush Crime Family showed up, the DOJ was independent of the White House. Under Clinton, as an example, only 3 people in the White House were allowed to communicate with 4 people in the DOJ. This is a permutation of 12. I don't know the exact number of WH contacts with DOJ contacts, but the permutation was OVER 400!
Obama's political advisers would rather NOT have an investigation, however, the real decision is out of the White House's perview if government functions according to the Constitution. Government Criminal Prosecutions are the responsibility of DOJ, not the White House as in the last 8 years.
What I am saying is that this is the PROPER way for our government to run. DOJ is INDEPENDENT of the WH, and DOJ selects it's own cases; not the WH deciding what cases the DOJ should prosecute! After 8 long years of the Bush Monarchy, people have forgotten this seperation of powers.
Legally, the DOJ is the proper authority to investigate and bring charges if laws have been broken. It is NOT Obama's decision..
Politically, this is the best of all worlds with the Democratic President wanting to go forward, but the DOJ, in it's proper function, has an obligation to look at the Past to see if King George or any of his cronies broke serious, and important laws and rights of it's citizenry!
Go ERIC, GO!
LuZenMyMnd
· 4 months ago
Also...IF the president keeps preaching "the rule of law" to other nations...it'd behoove us to practice what we preach.
Laur
· 4 months ago
I think you're right--I hope that the president starts to walk it like he talks it. The DOJ is supposed to be nonpartisan (HAH!--the previous administration really took care of that!), so Holder should go ahead and recommend the investigation. He should also refrain from so much out-loud thinking. Just do his job and when there are questions about it (inevitably), he can answer those insofar as it is appropriate to--since it's usually not appropriate when an investigation is underway.
tyree
· 4 months ago
what were you thinking if you actually followed the setup to the democratic debates? did you not see the trap being set by the news whores takeing the debates away from the league of women voters and showing off the newly approved corporate repigs who were masquardeing as democrats? clinton or obama take your pick , the corporations were comfortable with either of them! of course thier can be no investigations into torture, by obamas gang they are the new war criminals in charge!
PeteWa
· 4 months ago
Cheney and Bush should be in the Hague already.
Dateline_Molly
· 4 months ago
And Obama's already on his way.
Rufus
· 4 months ago
Perhaps Holder doesn't want to be an accomplice after the fact. And, of course, he would also saving his President from being an accomplice after the fact.
Ferdiad
· 4 months ago
Being a nation of laws, not of men, is what has separated this country for centuries now. If the rule of law is not upheld by a Democratic President, despite political fallout, we might as well throw in the towel.
Clem
· 4 months ago
Newsweek has an interesting article on all of this. And as if we didn't already know, this quote sums up what is going on:
"Emanuel and other administration officials could see that the politics of national security was turning against them. When I interviewed a senior White House official in early April, he remarked that Republicans had figured out that they could attack Obama on these issues essentially free of cost. "The genius of the Obama presidency so far has been an ability to keep social issues off the docket," he said."
"...White House officials have complained that Holder and his staff are not sufficiently attuned to their political needs. Holder is well liked inside the department.
[snip]
Among some White House officials there is a not-too-subtle undertone suggesting that Holder has "overlearned the lessons of Marc Rich," as one administration official said to me..." ~ Daniel Klaidman
There seems to be more to Eric Holder than meets the eye.
LuZenMyMnd
· 4 months ago
Why can't we ditch the politics and just do the right thing? I am so sick of watching the spin on all this that I had to turn the t.v. off today. The republicans need to admit that Cheney was a rogue politician. Throw him under the bus and try to start over.
ezpz
· 4 months ago
Completely agree.
And you may not want to watch Anderson Cooper's interview of Obama, which will air tomorrow night. The 'tease' I saw was about just this subject. Obama said something to the effect that certain (new) things had been brought to his attention that he may need to look into.
What bothered me was his use of the first person "me" "my" and "I" because it says that any investigation or subsequent prosecution would be his decision and not an independent one made by the Justice Dept. In other words, as you and others rightly point out, it's all politics and nothing to do with "just do the right thing".
LuZenMyMnd
· 4 months ago
News junkie that I am (I gotta get a life and watch a comedy here or there) I'll be watching Anderson Cooper.
I've never seen politics spun to this magnitude by republicans and dems...We've already started airing the dirty laundry. Pull the covers off. Let the chips fall where they lie. These professional politicians covering their asses is not what we voted for and it's not building confidence.
During the campaign the thing I admired Barack for was his long-term perspective and his strategic genius during his campaign...that same thing is ticking me off as well now. lol
TheOriginalLiz
· 4 months ago
The political machine will do whatever it takes to protect its own. Often at the expense of the citizenry.
JoeSudbay
· 4 months ago
Just remember how some people claimed Obama absolutely had to defend DOMA because it was the law. And, Obama wasn't going to play politics with the law like Bush did. This seems to contradict that argument.
Butch1
· 4 months ago
Yes, there have been one too many "flip-flops" from Obama since he's been in office. I've lost my trust in him and reading here yesterday that he is now doing "signing-statements" has confirmed my suspicions that we have been duped by the ultimate pro.
LuZenMyMnd
· 4 months ago
Butch1, I certainly hope you're wrong. I really do. And I am somewhat heartenedby by rep Patrick Murphy (?) on one of the shows today who said he is heading up the DODT issue in congress.
I still have hope.
Butch1
· 4 months ago
I hope I'm wrong as well but, with the facts staring back at me, it makes me wonder if we've been had.
Don't you find it amazing that it takes a straight, married man by the name off Rep. Murphy, combat vet of the Iraq era, to try and get the ball moving on this when we have three gay representatives in Congress who have done nothing to advance this legislation.
Grrrowler
· 4 months ago
This does make me wonder how many Dems could be implicated by an investigation. But, if that happens then it happens. Regardless of political party, if someone was complicit in torture, they need to answer for it too. I just hope that this isn't the reason Obama seems to be so against any torture investigation. I'm just so tired of politics being more important that accountability. I had really hoped we were past that with Obama being elected.
naschkatzehussein
· 4 months ago
Aside from torture which we all have been clamoring to be investigated, in recent days other allegations have been coming to light against Dick Cheney. In particular his assassination ring. I am hoping Leon Panetta is at a breaking point with the CIA and will push the leaning Holder a little more. As for Rahm Emanuel, he is imho the worst appointment Obama has made, and he is proving to be ineffectual on working with the Congress as well.
Dateline_Molly
· 4 months ago
I wouldn't get your hopes up. Greenwald over at Salon is saying they threw up this news to gauge reaction and that Holder has other ideas about who he would want to prosecute, making the entire endeavor useless.
JoeSudbay
· 4 months ago
When it comes to these issues, Glenn and Marcy Wheeler are in a league of their own. I do think it's important for us to call the refusal to investigate a craven political decision, because it is.And, that runs counter to the Obama brand. From what I hear, one thing those top political aides worry most about is damaging the brand. Craven and cynical are the opposite of hope and change.
ezpz
· 4 months ago
I just read that and as much as I want to believe that justice will be served regardless of how high up the investigations lead, Gleen's points are well taken. I tend to agree with him and doubt that much will come of this.
*sigh*
Indigo
· 4 months ago
Everything is about politics. Ask Equality Florida, the Human Rights Campaign, the Advocate, Barney Frank, any of the self-identified "leaders" of the gay community. It's all about posture and politics and genrous donations. Let's not fuss over substance here. < / angry snark >
flug
· 4 months ago
"an investigation might spawn partisan debates"
It's hard to imagine how the Republicans could become any more partisan and vicious than they already are.
If this wonderful bi-partisanship--or even the occasional few Rs voting with the President--were happening, then there might be a political reason to hold back.
But with the situation as it actually is, there is not even a political reason.
LuZenMyMnd
· 4 months ago
Where In The World IS Dick Cheney?
Before they couldn't keep him off o mic. NOW....he's NO Where to be found.
barkleyg
· 4 months ago
More importantly, where is LIZ ?
LuZenMyMnd
· 4 months ago
Yanno? All of a sudden....Cheney camp is on deaf-mouf (as my kids would say). lol
I'm sure they'll concoct a new "strategy" and everyone will be hitting the circuit soon. Who knows...even mom Cheney might get out there.
ezpz
· 4 months ago
Obama just extended his secret service protection.
A senior Obama administration official - CIA Director Leon Panetta - got caught lying to Congress about torture. That's the only reason Attoney Generalissimo Holder's taking this matter seriously now (after weeks of saying there will be no investigation at all). It isn't because the DOJ abhors torture and finds it morally wrong. It is because of the politics. They tried to outmaneuver Pelosi and the House Democrats. They got burnt.
Another dissapointing turn, although not an entirely surprising one, for the so-called "change" administration. It seems like this White House, like the Bush Corporation that preceded it, is treating everyone else like the enemy too. How incredibly sad.
Butch1
· 4 months ago
Hell, if they keep this up, maybe, we are. ;-)
mirth
· 4 months ago
Here's how this will go down:
Holder will appoint a special prosecutor, charges will be brought, a trial will follow but presented in such manner that charges are either dismissed earlyon or everyone is eventually found not gulity never to be charged again. Amidst all this cacophony, Sarah Palin will get her new libertarian-type, fundy-infused 3rd party off the ground, the media will be all over it, thus catapulting her party into legit status, and fed-up dems and reasonable republicans will opt out of the entire crooked mess and, voile!, President Palin after O's one and only term.
You heard it here first.
Ninong
· 4 months ago
Gerald Ford set a terrible example when he granted a pre-emptive pardon to Richard Nixon to prevent any criminal investigations that would have almost certainly resulted in indictment.
Any investigation into the activities of the Bush-Cheney administration will undoubtably uncover clear evidence of criminal acts ordered by Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Tenet, et al. The Republicans will paint it as a witch hunt and the Democrats will demand prosecution.
Either way the country will be divided. Apparently Obama thinks it is better to take the heat generated by not having the investigations in the first place rather than face the tough decisions that would face him once an independent prosecutor (a nice Republican like Patrick Fitzgerald) took over.
I'm not saying I agree with him but I think that's his position.
Butch1
· 4 months ago
"Either way the country will be divided..." =============================== Hell, it's divided now, what difference will it make? The need to do what's right and that is investigate this mess.
LuZenMyMnd
· 4 months ago
I agree w/your opinion on Nixon's pardon....and I really do believe Obama is attempting to hold a nation together to get some things accomplished before he risks Everything to cover the things he knows he can get through.
He can alienate the few and work on climate change and healthcare...or he can appease his base right now and fail on his main initiatives. 60 in the senate means little when he's got blue dogs barking at every turn. They might as well be republicans.
"might" is a mighty iffy word. I'll believe it when I see it. This administration and the AG like to float out possibilities and see how they play in the media before commiting. This is a sorry way to run your department. You don't think out loud; you make a decision and you follow through with it. Is Holder really this "mamby - pamby?"
bob_h
· 4 months ago
Don't fear the Republican reaction- they are the objects of public contempt and ridicule, and on the verge of total irrelevance. They are not ten feet tall.
All Comments
Is anyone old enough to remember "The Saturday Night Massacre?" Nixon kept firing those who wanted to investigate him. And the congress had to step in. Ah, if we only had brave congressmen now -- or a brave president. Either one would be nice.
Which is it, Obama, separate or not?
The first reason is named Bill Clinton. He authorized rendition (kidnapping), extreme rendition (kidnap/murder) and torture of political and military enemies as early as 1995. A year or so later he authored the embargo of medical supplies, food and sanitary supplies that murdered roughly half a million Iraqi children. Clintons Secretary of State Madeleine Albright thought it was a good plan in spite of the dead kids and babies.
On "60 Minutes" on May 12, 1996 Lesley Stahl asked Albright
The second reason is named Barak Obama. He’s continuing the occupation of Iraq and escalating US state terrorist violence against civilians in Afghanistan and Pakistan. He’s continuing rendition as long as it done outside of the US. He supported the FISA bill to excuse Bush’s widespread wiretapping. And etc.
If they go after Bush they’d be embarrassed for not going after Clinton and Obama.
====================================
Obama needs to learn that unresolved problems from the past will impede the "looking forward". He is so willing to not procecute crimes from the Bush era he will interfere. He needs to get out of the way of this decision. It makes me wonder why he is so protective of the Bush administration now when he was so against their lack of vision and management skills and out right breaking of the law when he was running for office. Does the rhetoric on the campaign trail have to be all lies?
As noisy as Cheney was last month, with all his program appearances, he couldn't be found to comment on this latest news that he may be brought up on charges. Now he's decided to get smart and shut his mouth before he incriminates himself further.
So he is not only disavowing any need for investigations, he is piling even more egregious policies ON TOP OF what Bush already did.
Political expediency. Barry is all about Barry. His glorious political career trumps the rule of law.
That and complicit Dems who know their asses are on the line with any investigation, too.
=====================================
It's looking more and more like that is the "prime objective." A progressive third party perhaps, or running someone against Obama?!!
But what REALLY gets me steaming mad is that both the State gov and Obama (and presumably most Senate Dems) are 100% behind Arlen. 2006 all over again (Holy Joe).
We HAVE to stop this. The PA gov even smirked and said to Sustack, "It is OK for you to run for reelection in the House, but NOT run for the Senate." WHAT? Who does he think he is????
===========================
The democratic party needs to be run by the people. We need to tell them who we want running. Since they are commited to backing Spector, who in my opinion, is still a republican, then all the democratic money in the state and else where needs to go against him. I'm tired of them selecting who we should vote for and not ourselves making that decision.
Cheaper words were never spoken.
Before the Bush Crime Family showed up, the DOJ was independent of the White House. Under Clinton, as an example, only 3 people in the White House were allowed to communicate with 4 people in the DOJ. This is a permutation of 12. I don't know the exact number of WH contacts with DOJ contacts, but the permutation was OVER 400!
Obama's political advisers would rather NOT have an investigation, however, the real decision is out of the White House's perview if government functions according to the Constitution. Government Criminal Prosecutions are the responsibility of DOJ, not the White House as in the last 8 years.
What I am saying is that this is the PROPER way for our government to run. DOJ is INDEPENDENT of the WH, and DOJ selects it's own cases; not the WH deciding what cases the DOJ should prosecute! After 8 long years of the Bush Monarchy, people have forgotten this seperation of powers.
Legally, the DOJ is the proper authority to investigate and bring charges if laws have been broken. It is NOT Obama's decision..
Politically, this is the best of all worlds with the Democratic President wanting to go forward, but the DOJ, in it's proper function, has an obligation to look at the Past to see if King George or any of his cronies broke serious, and important laws and rights of it's citizenry!
Go ERIC, GO!
And, of course, he would also saving his President from being an accomplice after the fact.
"Emanuel and other administration officials could see that the politics of national security was turning against them. When I interviewed a senior White House official in early April, he remarked that Republicans had figured out that they could attack Obama on these issues essentially free of cost. "The genius of the Obama presidency so far has been an ability to keep social issues off the docket," he said."
www.newsweek.com/id/206300/output/print
"Holder v. Rahm: The Torture Fight"
http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2009/07/11/ho...
"...White House officials have complained that Holder and his staff are not sufficiently attuned to their political needs. Holder is well liked inside the department.
[snip]
Among some White House officials there is a not-too-subtle undertone suggesting that Holder has "overlearned the lessons of Marc Rich," as one administration official said to me..." ~ Daniel Klaidman
http://www.newsweek.com/id/206300/output/print
There seems to be more to Eric Holder than meets the eye.
And you may not want to watch Anderson Cooper's interview of Obama, which will air tomorrow night.
The 'tease' I saw was about just this subject. Obama said something to the effect that certain (new) things had been brought to his attention that he may need to look into.
What bothered me was his use of the first person "me" "my" and "I" because it says that any investigation or subsequent prosecution would be his decision and not an independent one made by the Justice Dept. In other words, as you and others rightly point out, it's all politics and nothing to do with "just do the right thing".
I've never seen politics spun to this magnitude by republicans and dems...We've already started airing the dirty laundry. Pull the covers off. Let the chips fall where they lie. These professional politicians covering their asses is not what we voted for and it's not building confidence.
During the campaign the thing I admired Barack for was his long-term perspective and his strategic genius during his campaign...that same thing is ticking me off as well now. lol
I still have hope.
Don't you find it amazing that it takes a straight, married man by the name off Rep. Murphy, combat vet of the Iraq era, to try and get the ball moving on this when we have three gay representatives in Congress who have done nothing to advance this legislation.
*sigh*
< / angry snark >
It's hard to imagine how the Republicans could become any more partisan and vicious than they already are.
If this wonderful bi-partisanship--or even the occasional few Rs voting with the President--were happening, then there might be a political reason to hold back.
But with the situation as it actually is, there is not even a political reason.
Before they couldn't keep him off o mic. NOW....he's NO Where to be found.
I'm sure they'll concoct a new "strategy" and everyone will be hitting the circuit soon. Who knows...even mom Cheney might get out there.
http://www.usnews.com/blogs/washington-whispers...
Another dissapointing turn, although not an entirely surprising one, for the so-called "change" administration. It seems like this White House, like the Bush Corporation that preceded it, is treating everyone else like the enemy too. How incredibly sad.
Holder will appoint a special prosecutor, charges will be brought, a trial will follow but presented in such manner that charges are either dismissed earlyon or everyone is eventually found not gulity never to be charged again. Amidst all this cacophony, Sarah Palin will get her new libertarian-type, fundy-infused 3rd party off the ground, the media will be all over it, thus catapulting her party into legit status, and fed-up dems and reasonable republicans will opt out of the entire crooked mess and, voile!, President Palin after O's one and only term.
You heard it here first.
Any investigation into the activities of the Bush-Cheney administration will undoubtably uncover clear evidence of criminal acts ordered by Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Tenet, et al. The Republicans will paint it as a witch hunt and the Democrats will demand prosecution.
Either way the country will be divided. Apparently Obama thinks it is better to take the heat generated by not having the investigations in the first place rather than face the tough decisions that would face him once an independent prosecutor (a nice Republican like Patrick Fitzgerald) took over.
I'm not saying I agree with him but I think that's his position.
===============================
Hell, it's divided now, what difference will it make? The need to do what's right and that is investigate this mess.
He can alienate the few and work on climate change and healthcare...or he can appease his base right now and fail on his main initiatives. 60 in the senate means little when he's got blue dogs barking at every turn. They might as well be republicans.
http://www.light-to-dark.com/i_feel_your_pain.html