Seems the Blue Dogs are deal makers between the parties...link to their website..

[madfloridian]

for easier access to reaching them. It appears from what I have read, and what is also said in this Unity 08 post....that they take pride in reaching across the aisle. I know they are the ones, along with the New Democrat Coalition, who are summoned to meet with Bush or McConnell.

This time the deal they made put our personal freedoms in jeopardy.

From an article at Unity 08, urging that group to be sure to reach to the Blue Dogs...making clear they often stand with the Republicans.

Leveraging the Center

Leveraging the Center - The Blue Dog Democrats
posted by John Milligan on June 18, 2007 - 9:32am
Building from and on the Center – The Blue Dogs. THESE are the people we should be leveraging Unity 08 with on creating an implementable platform and pressuring the activist bases and attracting the electorate toward the rational center

Then the article presents where they stand on important issues that affect us greatly...quoting partialy from Wikipedia.

There was a phrase that came to mind as I read this description..."almost Democrats but keeping our options open".

Blue Dog Democrats are a group of 44 conservative to moderate Democratic Party members of the United States House of Representatives. The Blue Dogs are a coalition of like-minded Democrats whose primary mission is to promote fiscally responsible budget reforms and accountability for taxpayer dollars. Many members hail from conservative-leaning districts, where liberal Democrats and liberal values are a decided minority. Therefore, the Democratic Party has become more supportive of Blue Dog candidates in recent times. This was especially true in the 2006 election, when Blue Dog candidates such as Heath Shuler and Brad Ellsworth were elected in conservative-leaning districts, ending years of Republican dominance in these districts.

...The term is a reference to the "Blue Dog" paintings of Cajun artist George Rodrigue of Lafayette, Louisiana; the original members of the coalition would regularly meet in the offices of Louisiana representatives Billy Tauzin and Jimmy Hayes, both of whom had Rodrigue's paintings on their walls (and both of whom later switched to the Republican Party). The term is also probably meant as an ironic counterpoint to the traditional "Yellow Dog" label, which is applied to Southern Democrats so loyal to the party that they would vote for a yellow dog before voting for a Republican.

We have heard so much from both of our centrist coaltions...about personal responsibility. Only I feel both carry it to extremes at times.

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

30 of the 41 yes votes to give Bush and Gonzales more power on the surveillance issue were Blue Dogs. Six were New Democrats, the rest were not affiliated with either that I could see.

Their votes hurt us badly this time. I intend to make some calls tomorrow. I found the Blue Dogs site with links to their sites with contact info.

http://www.house.gov/ross/BlueDogs/Member%20Page.html

Here are the Yes votes:

Jason Altmire (4th Pennsylvania) New Democrat
John Barrow (12th Georgia) Blue Dog
Melissa Bean (8th Illinois) Blue Dog
Dan Boren (2nd Oklahoma) Blue Dog
Leonard Boswell (3rd Iowa) Blue Dog
Allen Boyd (2nd Florida) Blue Dog
Christopher Carney (10th Pennsylvania) Blue Dog
Ben Chandler (6th Kentucky) Blue Dog
Rep. Jim Cooper (5th Tennessee) Blue Dog
Jim Costa (20th California) Blue Dog
Bud Cramer (5th Alabama) Blue Dog
Henry Cuellar (28th Texas) New Democrat
Artur Davis (7th Alabama) New Democrat
Lincoln Davis (4th Tennessee) Blue Dog
Joe Donnelly (2nd Indiana) Blue Dog
Chet Edwards (17th Texas)
Brad Ellsworth (8th Indiana) Blue Dog
Bob Etheridge (North Carolina) New Democrat
Bart Gordon (6th Tennessee) Blue Dog
Stephanie Herseth Sandlin (South Dakota) Blue Dog
Brian Higgins (27th New York)New Democrat
Baron Hill (9th Indiana) Blue Dog
Nick Lampson (23rd Texas) Blue Dog
Daniel Lipinski (3rd Illinois)
Jim Marshall (8th Georgia) Blue Dog
Jim Matheson (2nd Utah) Blue Dog
Mike McIntyre (7th North Carolina) Blue Dog
Charlie Melancon (3rd Louisiana) Blue Dog
Harry Mitchell (5th Arizona)
Colin Peterson (7th Minnesota) Blue Dog
Earl Pomeroy (North Dakota) Blue Dog
Ciro Rodriguez (23rd Texas) Blue Dog
Mike Ross (4th Arkansas) Blue Dog
John Salazar (3rd Colorado) Blue Dog
Heath Shuler (11th North Carolina) Blue Dog
Vic Snyder (2nd Arkansas) New Democrat
Zachary Space (18th Ohio) Blue Dog
John Tanner (8th Tennessee) Blue Dog
Gene Taylor (4th Mississippi) Blue Dog
Timothy Walz (1st Minnesota)
Charles A. Wilson (6th Ohio) Blue Dog

(List from Daily Kos...but I added the New Democrats)

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/8/5/01943/25391

[Totally Committed]

1. That's depressing.

And, disgusting. I think Skinner needs to put Prozac in the water cooler!

Jeezuss.

TC

[Robbien]

2. The enemy within

Using Democratic resources to win a seat. Getting votes as a GOPer hiding behind a Democratic mask.

Which is worse, the opposing party or the enemy within?

[BeHereNow]

77. And THIS is our problem...

Wolves in Sheep's clothing.
BHN

[Jack Bone]

3. Thank you...for shedding some light on this..

K&R
:patriot:

[lyonn]

4. It appears they are mostly southern States

Guess that is the only way they can get the vote in repub areas. When will the South realize that the repubs are not in their best interest? That has always amazed me, being from Okla.. They keep saying they are not giving Their money to those on welfare!! They don't get it. Most don't make enough money to be effected no matter what the taxes.

[pocoloco]

7. nor have insurance.

[The Backlash Cometh]

5. Well done, MadFloridian.

"Reaching out across the aisle," is code words for, "I'm willing to leverage progressive ideals I don't care about anyways for deals that will personally enrich me or, at least put me in a position for pork down the road."

[Me.]

6. The New Democrats

As per our conversation on the other thread I am providing a couple of links which have more info:

http://www.nndb.com/group/269/000093987/


www.nndb.com/org/415/000121052/

Another person to keep an eye on is Ellen Tauscher, who has a lot of fingers in Lieberman/Republican lite pies

[The Backlash Cometh]

11. I call them old guard Dems.

At least, that's what I'd call the Florida branch of them.

[peacetalksforall]

8. Why do we go along with calling them blue dogs when they are

red and orange - they make Democracy go up in flames.

[The Backlash Cometh]

10. Not orange. Orange is the color of impeachment.

They should be called green dogs, since making money is what they're most interested in doing.

[checks-n-balances]

48. "Green dogs"! funny!

Or maybe "Red dogs" as in the "Red states" idea.

I've always found it ironic that today's rethugs choose the color of "commies" and blood to identify themselves.

[dysfunctional press]

75. why is orange the colour of impeachment?

:shrug:

[in_cog_ni_to]

9. The party has been destroyed from WITHIN. How clever.

And to think some people welcomed them all with open arms just to have a Majority in Congress. I hope it was worth it to them.:(

[Horse with no Name]

49. Exactly what we have been saying

They are Trojan Horses. Utilizing Democratic resources to further Republican goals.

[baby_mouse]

12. "Rational centre"...

Hm. Okay, Mr Centrist.

So, essentially, if the Right just keeps going right and right and right, the way to stay rational is to go right at approximately half the rate that they do?

"Oh, of course not. Don't be silly. That's not what we're doing at all"

Well, actually, that is pretty much exactly what you *have* been doing.

WHY are you reaching across to these people? Have you considered the possibility that they know you only exist to reach out to them, and then they adjust their position accordingly so that they always get what they want? All they have to do is make their position publically more extreme than they actually think they need to get a result on and eventually you'll cave in to some sort of "compromise", the structure of which will be exactly what they wanted anyway.

[eridani]

13. They aren't the problem. Their constituents are.

They are essentially holdovers from the era when the Democrats were also the Official White Man's Party. If FDR hadn't compromised with them, there wouldn't have been a New Deal at all.

In order to get elected, they have to reflect the all white traditional values of 60% of their constituents. It's all a matter of percentages--there are certainly quite a few of the same sort of racists in the rest of the country, but they are 40% instead of 60%.

[madfloridian]

14. No one should vote with constituents who are just plain wrong.

That is where I have a problem.

They have a responsibility to speak out with the truth, to inform their constituents of what is really happening.

If you vote with people who are wrong, you destroy our country.

[eridani]

16. Their constituents know what is happening, and they like it. n/t

[madfloridian]

17. Can you be specific just which ones?

?

[eridani]

19. The traditionalists whose main hobby is blood sports of some kind

Kick their ass and take their gas. Covert white supremacists, nativists and xenophobes. The people who expect to be spies and executioners instead of the spied-upon and the executed. The people who want executions to proceed even in the presence of exonerating evidence. Gay-bashers and cheerleaders for rapists. The people whose grandparents collected picture postcards of lynchings--

http://www.liu.edu/cwis/CWP/library/african/2000/lynching.htm

[madfloridian]

20. Perhaps our Democrats should not stand with racists and supremacists.

We really need to draw the line somewhere as to right and wrong.

[eridani]

23. If they stand against racists, they get unelected in districts where racists are the majority

It's a disgusting fact of American life, but even our Constitution exists only because of a compromise with slavery. Racist whites (not only in the South, of course, but elsewhere they don't have the numerical clout) have always controlled the balance of power between the economic elite and those of us who have taken our ideals seriously. They have prevented the cross-race class alliance that would have made us look more like other industrial democracies.

We have made progress in the last couple of hundred years, but it's always under threat of being undone.

[madfloridian]

27. Ok.

Then may I suggest they are not acting in the best interests of those people. By enabling them.

I have been in too many heated discussions here lately, so not going to argue.

[madfloridian]

31. So...you really do believe they need to stand with racists or lose?

Isn't that sad? No one wins that way.

[eridani]

56. That's more or less the case

With the shitty job market and outsourcing, solidarity is really a hard sell.

[creeksneakers2]

15. I can understand if they vote moderately or conservatively

I can't endorse them voting for a right wing attack on civil liberties.

[johnfunk]

18. Vichy-crats! The whole bunch!

Time for a few serious primary challenges, if you ask me...

[madfloridian]

21. From Texas, comparison of Yellow and Blue Dogs...

I found this very interesting.

Barking and Biting

The term "yellow dog" derives from the saying, "I'd vote for a yellow dog if he ran on the Democratic ticket." In the 1928 presidential election campaign, yellow dog Democrats were Alabamans who remained loyal to the party even though they did not like the Democratic candidate, Al Smith. Because the expression came generally to be used to describe loyal Southern Democrats, it also frequently had a somewhat moderate to conservative connotation, as if referring to "old school" Democrats.

Even as yellow dogs were becoming a rare breed, the "dog" moniker got refurbished, though on a smaller scale. After the Republican Party won the majority in the U.S. House of Representatives in 1994, a group of thirty-three conservative Democrats formed the Blue Dog Coalition. The Blue Dogs represent a stronger break from the national (more liberal) Democratic Party, and could be traced back to Democrats who crossed party lines to support some of Ronald Reagan's policies in the 1980s.

In the 108th Congress (2002-2004), there were thirty-six Blue Dog Democrats, twelve from former Confederate states, counting three from Texas. Another six Blue Dogs represented Virginia, Missouri, Florida, and Kentucky. Befitting a more modern group, they even have a website. Yet old yellow dogs can learn new tricks, too--the official weblog of the Democratic Party is called the Yellow Dog Blog.

That blog they speak of is no longer there.

Everything I read sounds like the Blue Dogs are bigger on "reaching across party lines" than they are on standing for Democratic values. They are very big on cooperation, but at times that can come back to bite us.

[Solly Mack]

22. Thanks!

:)

[Tatiana]

24. Targeting Blue Dogs in Southern states at this time is not wise.

It's a situation where we have to hold our noses and vote for the "D."

However, I'm all for targeting Blue Dogs in states like California, New York, and Illinois. I believe we can elect more progressive Dems in those states.

Seems to me like our strategy needs to be:

a) Target Republics in all so-called "blue" states (e.g. California and New York).

b) Use Gov. Dean's southern strategy to continue to make inroads with Southern voters (Texas, Georgia, Tennessee, Louisiana, etc.)

c) Aggressively target Republics in heartland states such as Missouri, Ohio, and Indiana.

Our main goal should be replacing "R's" with "D's" in traditionally progressive states. If we can establish progressive majorities in our own party, the "Blue Dogs" will become increasingly irrelevant. Then Republics will have no choice except to bargain with the progressive Democrats.

[madfloridian]

30. Then we will continue to get what we got this week-end.

The bowing down to the emperor in fear.

[Tatiana]

46. Look, I was born and raised in Texas/Arkansas.

Unfortunately, though there are some PHENOMENAL Dems in TX (and a few in AR), the majority of the voting public pull the lever for Republics. And not just the Olympia Snowe type Republics. No... they go for the Kay Bailey Hutchisons and the John Cornyns and the Inhofes and Coburns and the Shelbys and Stevens... I could go on and on. Do you think the people who vote for those insane, bought-and-paid-for Rethugs are going to pull the lever for a Democrat? We thought they might in Tennessee. Ask Harold Ford, Jr. how that turned out.

A long-term strategy will have to be employed to deal with the conservative states. For the short-term, we are losing key battles due to failed Democratic leadership, plain and simple. Harry and Nancy/Steny needed to have been twisting arms on such a critical vote. They didn't, bottom line. Party discipline is the responsibility of the leadership team. I.E. "You vote for this bill, we might find another Dem to fund in the primary for your seat." The Democratic party as an entity also has the power of the purse to use. But they don't use it. Case in point, the backing Lieberman received from various Democrats, even though he changed his party affiliation.

Yes, the Blue Dogs suck. Yes, sometimes I wish they'd just join the Republican party and be done with. But do I want a Republican in their stead? Hell no.

[sandnsea]

50. Arkansas is almost all Dem

Two Senators, 3 of 4 Reps, Gov, Lt Gov, and both houses are a solid Dem majority. They simply need to be told the truth and they don't have a media or an elected official that will do it. The long term strategy is the same as the short term strategy - somebody has got to start talking sense.

[madfloridian]

52. Good statement.

They need to speak the truth and educate them if the media won't. There are ways.

Glad you said that.

:hi:

[sanskritwarrior]

25. Alright!!!!!!

another attack on Centrist Democrats thread.......It's been what 5 seconds since the last one......

Yes chase out all the Centrist Dems elected in conservative districts and embrace permanent minority stauts........Hooray for emotional ranting and a dearth of common sense.........

One more reason to loathe PROGRESSIVES, this continued hatred towards Centrist democrats.......calls to purge blue dog democrats, and my personal favorite, calling them traitors because they represented their constituents............Way to go Progressives, keep cutting off your nose to spite your faces......Now if you will kindly sit down, serious people have serious things to do......

[madfloridian]

29. Did you read my post or does it matter?

That I took time to be fairly reasonable considering my personal freedoms were ruled null and void this week-end.

You and I should just ignore each other.

[sanskritwarrior]

54. So you are pissed off that representatives from districts outside your

own did something you don't like.......Just admit it....

[madfloridian]

55. Hey

Bye Bye

[sanskritwarrior]

71. LOL

another progressive succumbs to truth madness.......

I tell a truth that representatives are free to represent their districts and the progressives go bonkers.........Lovely.....

[Raksha]

44. So you're saying their constituents are traitors too?

Re ...calls to purge blue dog democrats, and my personal favorite, calling them traitors because they represented their constituents...

You've shown your true colors (as a matter of fact, you showed your true colors some time ago), and I am putting you on Ignore.

[sanskritwarrior]

53. LOL

gotta love that tolerant progressive streak where it is a crime for Constituents to ask their represenatives to vote accordingly.......

You and others like you are just pissed off because you didn't get your way....... Face it, this is America and our representatives have to please personalities in 535 different districts........

[eggman67]

69. What's funny is

When they're rep doesn't do what they want they complain he's not listening to his constituents, but if someone elses rep wants something different than they do then they complain he shouldn't listen to his constituents.

Gotta love it.

[Forkboy]

26. There was a time when that would be welcome.

Now isn't such a time.

[madfloridian]

32. When what would be helpful?

What they did or what I posted.

[Forkboy]

34. Reaching out to the other side.

Compromise isn't a dirty word...at least until now.We can't afford it anymore until we've reestablished some kind of balance.The Right has us on the defensive all the time.Until the shoe is on the other foot any compromise we make just hurts us more.

And all the stuff you post is helpful.Truly. :)

[madfloridian]

35. I agree. There is a time when compromise is no longer safe for our country.

:hi:

[Raksha]

28. Thanks for posting this link and the traitors' list. Very informative...

I just found out my own rep (Joe Baca, CA-43) is a Blue Dog Democrat!!!

[Maddy McCall]

33. I love Gene Taylor. He's a great representative.

Don't care who disagrees with me.

[madfloridian]

37. I love and donated to some on the list.

But they were wrong on this issue.

Bush was given too much power because the bill was rushed upon them.

I can sympathize, but they should not have voted for it.

[Maddy McCall]

39. So they were wrong on this issue.

They'll be wrong on others.

Even the most liberal representatives are wrong here and there.

But Gene Taylor is far from a traitor...anyone who thinks that can, frankly, bite me.

(Not you--I appreciate that you see that they were wrong on an issue, that their whole legislative careers should not be summed up by this one vote.)

[sandnsea]

51. Change Minds, Change Votes

Doesn't really matter what the man believes, if his entire constituency believes the liberals want to hand the country over to the terrorists, his hands are tied on certain votes. And if they believe that government is the source of all evil and you don't want to give it a penny more than you have to, then his hands are also tied on taxes and certain spending bills. Nothing will change until grassroots Dems create a strategy to go block by block and talk to people.

[onenote]

36. the erroneous assumptions about Blue Dogs on DU never ceases to amaze me

Thread after thread about the Blue Dogs contain posts suggesting that they are no different than repubs. You would think that they never vote with their own party other, apparently, to organize the Congress. Personally, if that was in fact true, I'd still take a Blue Dog over a repub for that very reason. Seiously, even someone with short term memory loss must remember that there was a lot of support here for Nick Lampson's effort -- ultimately successful -- to take the seat formerly occupied by Tom Delay. But now, you'd think that he's just a clone of Delay from what some people post.

Here's a little factoid. The House voted 218-212 to set a timetable to bring the troops home. It was vetoed, but it was an important milestone (and that veto is going to be shoved down repubs votes in 2008 to the benefit of Democrats).


Pop quiz: How many repubs supported that bill? And how many Blue Dogs supported it. If you know the answer, you know that equating Blue Dogs to repubs is bullshit.

[Maddy McCall]

38. Thanks for this post.

Thanks for bringing intelligence into a thread that is null of it.

[onenote]

40. no problem..and here's the answer to the pop quiz

2 repubs supported the timetable bill.
41 out of 48 Blue Dogs supported it.

[madfloridian]

41. I thought my OP was pretty intelligent and balanced.

But then lately here I have been slammed for taking up for Democrats, so not sure what is going on.

Can't please everyone.

They sold us out this week-end, and they did it on the bankruptcy bill. I think we should speak up on things like this.

Sorry it is not considered an intelligent post.

[Maddy McCall]

42. No...

I'm talking about the people who are using the info you provided to call the "Blue Dogs" traitors.

It's the bloodlust in this thread that's ridiculous.

[madfloridian]

43. Thanks....

I agree. I have been a victim of stuff like that this week. I have seen other long time people here get the same treatment. It is painful. There has been too much of the hateful stuff. But it is getting worse, and will continue.

Lowering my expectations...on the floor.

[Maddy McCall]

45. I am sorry...

that I used your thread to vent.

:hug:

I've had great correspondence with Gene Taylor. He's one of the good guys. I can't stand to see him labeled as a traitor. I am sorry that I took my angst out on you.

[harun]

73. I am glad you spoke up about it (n/t)

[OzarkDem]

62. They've done much to hurt their cause

the latest fiasco on the FISA bill is just one of many. If they want the respect and support of rank and file Dems, they need to start doing their homework on legislation and taking a principled stand instead of blindly colluding with the Bush administration.

The next election will come as a big surprise for these folk when they suddenly have to defend their close relationships with a president their voters don't support.

[madfloridian]

47. And yet another description of this group and of the Yellow Dogs.

http://www.yellowdogdemocrat.com/history.htm

"A Yellow Dog Democrat is a staunch loyalist to the Democratic Party. These days, the term is widely recognized as an expression of regard and, as such, it is only used in a manner of praise. Yellow Dog Democrats embody loyalty. This is a trait that should never ever be taken for granted by any Party nor by any individual for that matter. The Democrat Party recognizes this, thus correctly acknowledges the Yellow Dog Democrat as some of their "Best Friends".

And the Blue Dogs below that description:

"Blue Dog Democrats, on the other hand,
are a relatively new group. The Blue Dogs are made up of approximately thirty (forty something now) conservative-leaning House Democrats who came together in 1995 to contest the liberal inclinations of the Democratic party. The Blue Dogs have now become the balance of power in the closely divided House.

The term, Blue Dog Democrat, is playfully derived from the original term "Yellow Dog Democrat". It was Former Democrat Rep. Pete Geren, of Texas, who said that the members have been "choked blue" by those extreme Democrats, from the left. Thus, he is credited for coining the term Blue Dog Democrat.

Blue Dogs are descendants of a 1950s defunct Southern Democratic group once known as the 'Boll Weevils', who played a critical role, in the early 1980s, by supporting President Ronald Reagan's tax cut plan. Well anyway, Boll Weevil is out and Blue Dog is in. Today, the Senate has its very own version of the Blue Dogs, a.k.a. the New Democrat Coalition, which took shape in 1999."

[nolabels]

67. In other words they are basically inert most of the time.

Yet when it becomes critical to their wants they swing like a weather vane. Their biggest reason for them being is to occupy a space where some real politicians could operate. They take their state for a ride and screw the whole of us at opportune times. Remember Cons want government to fail so privatization can fill the void. Why wouldn't certain monied aspects fund and support such aspects a group like the blue dogs?

The simple fact that the elected and appointed federal government officials mostly represent the funds the put them there should not be a surprise. Where are them Hilary supporters anyway. Didn't Hilary take the stand that any lobbyist money is good money :shrug:

[Hell Hath No Fury]

57. Thanks for all the hard work!

:hi:

I am working on a letter to fax each and every one of them right now. :mad:

[madfloridian]

59. Just talked to Bill Nelson's office. He has no comment.

He never has a comment. He thinks he never has to justify his vote. He gets higher favorability ratings with Republicans than he does Democrats.

He just doesn't worry about what we think

[madfloridian]

58. Has anyone posted a list with phone numbers of the yes votes?

I have the link in the OP to their websites, but it would be nice to have a list of numbers.

[madfloridian]

60. Spy chief courts Blue Dogs for FISA law overhaul.....with success.

Spy chief courts Blue Dogs for FISA law overhaul

From August 2
http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/spy-chief-courts-blue-dogs-for-fisa-law-overhaul-2007-08-02.html

"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."

..."“We hope that we’ll be able to have that legislation done quickly,” Reid said. “It’s not a certainty, but we will do all we can.”

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."

[Freddie Stubbs]

61. With a small majority it is necessary for the parties to work together

[madfloridian]

63. There is no way you can believe that on this bill.

Sometimes it is time to at least be critical.

If you think it was good for them to make Bush's illegal acts legal, then you don't realize what harm they did.

[truedelphi]

64. Sorry but no!!!!! n/t

[tavalon]

65. I never knew what the Blue Dog label came from

I love Rodrique's Blue Dog paintings. I hate the Blue Dogs. I have no point here.

[madfloridian]

66. Angry blog: At least the Blue Dogs are paper-trained

'cause they pissed all over the Constitution!"

http://www.correntewire.com/at_least_the_blue_dogs_are_paper_trained_cause_they_pissed_all_over_the_constitution

"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-Capitulation), 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.

Interesting. Secure location where? Cheney’s bunker?

The DNI’s office also reached out to Rep. Jane Harman (D-Capitulation), 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.

Harman said that she has been privy to information about the increased terrorist “chatter” and believes there’s a real risk that terrorists could strike in this country in August, and that an overhaul of the bill could help the NSA deter it.

“The two of us became lead dogs on this,” Cramer said."

My comment: fear terror fear terror

[eek]

72. We are all their constituents in this matter.

their vote affects every one of us, regardless of congressional district.

That'll be the gist of my letters to all of those vacationers.



That plus the word "SHAME"




:mad:

[CrispyQ]

68. Look how few are being challenged.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x1519118

A great list, compliments of Derby378:

[madfloridian]

70. I think some will be.

By several groups.

[AllyCat]

74. Billy Tauzin?? That should be a warning right there. n/t

[madfloridian]

76. Allen Boyd's office said it took courage to vote against your party.

I thought that was an amazing thing to say since they voted to give Bush and Gonzo total power.

[madfloridian]

78. One last kick.

.