An Entire Community Left Behind in New Orleans?

An Entire Community Left Behind in New Orleans?

An entire community of hard-working Americans is incredulous at the thought that they are being left behind by their government in Katrina-battered Louisiana. The federal government is not sure whether it is "worthwhile to spend so much money to protect 14,000 people" [because it's only 2 percent of the population of metropolitan New Orleans.] That's 14,000 hard-working Americans whose only "sin" was to live in a city that wound up being in the direct path of a disastrous hurricane.

"We have sacrificed a great deal for this nation, and now to turn their back on us and cut us off would be un-American," said Benny Rousselle, [lower Plaquemines parish president.] "We're fighting for our survival."

Walesa: U.S. Has Lost Moral Superiority

Walesa: U.S. Has Lost Moral Superiority

No one doubts America's economic power, but we have lost our standing as a moral superpower. That's basically what former Polish president and Nobel laureate Lech Walesa told a group today during a lecture at Kansas State University.

"No one has the least doubt that you are the economic leader and the military leader to the world, but I have heard a lot of doubts regarding the moral and political leadership of the United States."

I'm glad that Mr. Walesa has spoken clearly on this matter. I want to be proud of my leadership once again. The strength of our democracy is that we know that can elect new leadership in due time. The People want more than they have gotten from the morally bankrupt majority in Washington D.C. November can't come too soon for us.

If we ever expect to lead other nations to the light of freedom by inspiration and example, we must start by setting some examples.

Rumsfeld Must Go

Rumsfeld Must Go

Reuters is reporting that six retired generals have now called for Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld to step down, including two who spoke out today. The White House needs to act now. The longer they wait, the deeper the unrest will become with the general public. We are a nation at war, and it is a war that was so badly mishandled by the present Secretary of Defense that even Newt Gingrich has felt the need to speak out. When retired Generals publicly revolt and the White House carries on as if it's business as usual, it puts our Republic's domestic and national security in peril. Pretending there is no problem is a charade that our nation can't afford to continue. If we are going to truly support our troops and hope for a new plan to handle the mess known as Iraq, we must see Mr. Rumsfeld step down now.

Raise the Federal Minimum Wage

Raise the Federal Minimum Wage

A Job Should Keep You Out of Poverty, Not Keep You In It by Rev. Dr. Paul H. Sherry, Campaign Coordinator of the Let Justice Roll Living Wage Campaign, Coordinator of the Anti-Poverty Program of the National Council of Churches and co-author, with Holly Sklar, of "A Just Minimum Wage: Good for Workers, Business and Our Future." [CAP]

Not Everyone in Media Was Wrong About Iraq

Not Everyone in Media Was Wrong About Iraq

Steve Rendell points out that not everyone in the media was wrong about Iraq.

Charles J. Hanley has had his hand in some big stories...As Hanley reported, when inspectors returned to Iraq, they visited the Al Tuwaitha site and found no evidence to support Bush’s claim. “Since December 4 inspectors from [Mohamed] ElBaradei’s International Atomic Energy Agency have scrutinized that vast complex almost a dozen times, and reported no violations.” The same was true of site after site, as Hanley reported:

In almost two months of surprise visits across Iraq, U.N. arms monitors have inspected 13 sites identified by U.S. and British intelligence agencies as major “facilities of concern,” and reported no signs of revived weapons building, an Associated Press analysis shows.

Hanley’s story should have been one of the most important of the pre-war period. By debunking the very claims that had been advanced as proof of an Iraqi threat, Hanley’s analysis ought to have cast severe doubt on the White House’s entire evaluation of the Iraqi threat.

Bloggers Hit New Low on Jill Carroll Story

Bloggers Hit New Low on Jill Carroll Story

Ellen Goodman blasts the bloggers who couldn't wait to shoot off their mouths about Jill Carrol before they had any facts.

In 2004, they proved the power of the Internet as a great equalizer when they confronted the house of CBS and Dan Rather over Bush's military records.[..]Two years later, we have -- ready, fire, aim -- the Jill Carroll affair. These attacks raise the question of what bloggery is going to be when it grows up. An Internet op-ed page? Or a polarized, talk-radio food fight?

Power must be used wisely. I recall being blasted by Jim Geraghty on the NRO website when the bloggers were piling on Eason Jordan. Jim Geraghty had written about my comment:

“Those who are hot on Eason’s trail are only those who wish to inflict some political damage on the few in the mainstream media who still possess extreme courage of conviction.”

He said:

You know, I try (and sometimes fail) to refrain from speculating about others’ motives. I would appreciate it if others extended the same courtesy to me. Everybody, Ms Camwell? Mickey Kaus? Jay Rosen? Glenn Reynolds? They’re all trying to attack “the few in the mainstream media who still possess extreme courage of conviction”? Come on.

I tend to be blunt, but I also consider myself to be a principled and conscientious human being. I can see what is directly in front of my eyes, and what I saw was a concerted effort to ruin a professional journalist's integrity for speaking out on behalf of fellow professionals. I am a "little" blogger with a voice that was big enough to cause Jim Geraghty to feel that he had to defend himself. Why? Because I hit a sensitive spot. I can never assign motives to one person, but I could clearly see the overt motives of the blogmob. I don't get on my blog with the fierce determination to "gun" for Brit Hume's professional integrity. (He does a good job of ruining it all by himself by simply opening his mouth on Fox News each day).

Those who live by this kind of determination risk to be called on it when they succeed. While they may think they have good reason to join in the attack, they cannot distance themselves from it later on and try to look removed and innocent. They succeeded with Dan Rather. They succeeded with Eason Jordan. They succeeded with Trent Lott. Make no mistake, these were blog campaigns and they were witchhunts. Trent Lott didn't deserve what happened to him. Neither did Dan Rather and Eason Jordan.

________________________

"This was a guy caught up in the tension of the moment. He deserves the benefit of the doubt."

David Gergen, referring to Eason Jordan who had just returned from Baghdad and was still "deeply distraught" over the journalists who'd died in Iraq. [WaPo 2-8-05]

"Funnies" and Looking Back

"Funnies" and Looking Back

I'll start with a joke that I read at Comedy Central's website:

A judge asks a defendant to please stand. "You are charged with murdering a school teacher with a chain saw." From out in the audience a man shouts, "You lying bastard!"

"Silence in the court!" the judge shouted back. He turns to the defendant again and says, "You are also charged with killing a paperboy with a shovel."

"You goddamned tightwad!" blurted the spectator.

"Quiet!" yelled the judge. "You are also charged with killing a mailman with an electric drill."

"You cheap son of a..." the man starts to shout.

The Judge thunders back "If you don''t tell me the reason for your outbursts right now, I will hold in contempt!"

"I''ve lived next to that lying bastard for ten years now, but do you think he ever had a f*****g tool when I needed to borrow one!"

I'm feeling nostalgic. Let's take a walk down Memory Lane.

One year ago on Iddybud Journal

Two Years Ago on Iddybud Journal

How to Organize Hispanic U.S. Workers

How to Organize Hispanic U.S. Workers

Act like white supremacist meatheads by promoting a public policy that looks like pre-Civil Rights America.

Speaking of marches that drew hundreds of thousands and created coalitions across the lines of Hispanic national identity, Juan Williams writes:

People from disparate Hispanic nations coalesced around the debate on illegal immigration. It took a radical step by the House -- giving serious thought to dragnet arrests of all illegal immigrants and charging them with a felony -- to achieve this. To some, the level of hatred and racism against immigrants seemed to match that once directed against blacks in this country.

Well done, Tancredo and Company. Bush got over 40% of the Hispanic vote in the last election. I'll wager you won't see that same enthusiasm for Republicans in future elections.

RNC Says Bush Leaked to Educate Citizens

RNC Says Bush Leaked to Educate Citizens

Responding to former Senator John Edward's comments regarding President Bush declassifying the NIE for political reasons, Republican National Committee spokeswoman Anne Marie Hauser said the information was declassified "for the purpose of educating the American people about the war on terror."

And what an education we had. We got big lies in the press from then-NY Times journalist Judith Miller, who naively swallowed dirty spoon-fed Joe Wilson/Valerie Plame-attacks at the direction of Vice President Dick Cheney, who preferred to have more faith in the lying weasel Ahmad Chalabi then our own CIA. We got "a degree" in how to lead a nation to unnecessary war based on the word of well-orchestrated liars and conspirators. With the blessing of the man in the Oval Office, apparently.

American spirits are crushed by the collective efforts of the Executive administration to "educate" us with lie after lie.

We've learned. Where's our diploma, already?

Israel Upset with Bush for Leak

Israel Upset with Bush for Leak

Bush's selective leaks are not only a problem in his own nation, he's got our best ally in the Middle East Israel steamed at him for his administration's brutal negligence.

tip of the hat to The Corpus Callosum

John Kerry on Meet the Press

John Kerry on Meet the Press

The absence of diplomacy in Iraq is nothing but negligence on the part of the White House. The U.S. needs to lead that effort and we have failed to do so. There is an absence of real leadership on Iraq. He said that he refuses to be a member of the Senate and add one more name to "the wall" without speaking up. We have to have a leadership that stops acting unilaterally.

Tim Russert used past statements to make Kerry look like the flip-flopper that he was made out to be by Republicans in the last election campaign. Senator Kerry said that back in 2004 when he made those statements,he assumed we were primarily fighting al Qaeda in Iraq (as the nation was being told). He now clearly sees that this fight is all about the indigenous population of Iraq. He made no excuses for the confusing things he may have said about the war in 2004, but it pales in comparison to what George W. Bush has done about the war.

Tim Russert read an excerpt from Senator John Edwards' "I was wrong." statement in the Washington Post last fall. Senator Kerry confirmed that he, too, takes responsibility for his Iraq War Resolution vote in 2002.

On the declassification of the NIE by Bush and attorney general Alberto Gonzalez' defense of the president's authority to do so, Kerry said it's time for the attorney general to stand up and defend the constitution rather than defending the President for wrongful acts. It was wrong for Bush to buttress phony arguments for going to war in a way that attacked people politically. The declassification was done for the MISLEADING of America and it's a disgrace, whether or not Bush had a right to do it. Kerry referred to G.W. Bush's own father George HW Bush, who said in 1999:

..we need more protection for the methods we use to gather intelligence and more protection for our sources, particularly our human sources, people that are risking their lives for their country. Even though I'm a tranquil guy now at this stage of my life, I have nothing but contempt and anger for those who betray the trust by exposing the name of our sources. They are, in my view, the most insidious, of traitors.

Kerry was rather cagey when he was asked about Russ Feingold's move for censure of the president, stepping around the real issue and saying that Americans are looking forward to how the government will lead them. [see this diary from the One America Committee about Senator John Edwards' position].

If the GOP did not have their own internal squabbles, Kerry said we would have had an immigration reform bill today.

He took personal responsibility for his presidential campaign in 2004. Message control will be very important in future elections.

Specter Blames Dems and Arcane Rules for Immigration Failure

Fox News Sunday: Specter Blames Dems and 'Arcane Rules' for Immigration Reform Failure

Arlen specter appeared on Fox News Sunday and in his first sentence, blamed the "arcane rules" of the Senate and blamed the Democrats for what appears to be the death of the immigration reform bill. Why is it that any time a Republican cannot get his way in the Senate that he blames the rules and ignores the facts?

Specter also strongly defended the President for leaking a CIA agent's name simply because he could....because he had a legal right to declassify information. He then, almost as an afterthought, he said that the matter needs looking further into. I wondered - at what point do Senators stop defending what they (and we) can clearly see as morally and traditionally wrong? Perhaps the Executive order allowing the President to declassify certain documents is already an "ARCANE RULE." [Note: Later in the day, Senator Specter was shown on CNN calling for more investigation into the declassification. I firmly do not believe that Senator Specter communicated the same strength of will when he appeared on Fox. He likely realized he was playing to two different audiences and "acted" accordingly.]

Fox News Sunday had Rep. Peter King (R-NY) as their guest. He's taken a hard-line stand on immigration reform. Brit Hume played semantics with King on the word "amnesty"...trotting out the Webster's Dictionary definition out. King tried to say thatthose who voted against reform were "intimidated" by the protests around the country. He never mentioned that their votes may have been based upon their individual conscience. He said we need to send a signal to other countries not to send illegals here. How about abolishing NAFTA and CAFTA? That would be a good start. They certainly have not created greater opportunity for Latin Americans in their own countries.

Zalmay Khalilzad, ambassador to Iraq, appeared as a guest. Iraqis leaders have not yet agreed on a government - Iraqis are becoming impatient - we need to press them to compromise. Condoleeza Rice and Jack Straw's politically motivated visit to the Iraqi leaders to put pressure on them didn't backfire. If the U.S. "abandons" Iraq, the sectarian conflict (in light of Iranian interests and US interests) will expand. Same old sh*t. Different day. I'm with Sen. Kerry - give them a deadline. May 15th. Or else we pull up stakes. It's going on four years. If they'd been hungry for democracy, they would have stepped up to the plate by now. We've brought them to the doorstep of freedom. Our loyal troops did their very best with the mission they were given - almost 2400 gave all for that mission. It's time for them to come home with honor. This is not worth the spilling of one more drop of American blood.

The Bush Leak and the Outing Of a CIA agent

Charles Krauthammer said that the whoile story about the Bush leak is "absurd." He went on to rehash all the destructive distortions about the victim of the politics of destruction here - Joseph Wilson IV. Maura Liasson ignorantly fell into the meaningless "talking point" question, "What is the definition of a leak?" Bill Kristol did a lot of fast-talking about the matter, bottom line is that he thinks Wilson deserved what he got (and he must think Valerie Plame Wilson deserved being outed, too). Kristol minimized he outing of Plame, framing it as "an afterthought". Juan Williams brought the question back to the crux of the case: "Did the White House lie to a grand jury? Did Bush obstruct justice?" and "Why didn't Libby leak information about the truth about Niger and the lack of credible evidence about WMD instead of outing Plame?" This was a scummy political attack - whether or not it was a leak. It had nothing to do with communicating a truth that Americans can look at today and say "I really trust this White House to do what is right and good for all of us." For Pete's sake - Bush dismantled a sensitive and important CIA operation on Iran with this declassification!

On Immigration

Who's more politically vulnerable on immigration? Juan Williams talked about the Republican base causing a rift among Republicans and the fact that unions are split on the issue which splits the Democrrats. Bill Kristol spoke of the mean-spirited nature of the hardline view. He held out hope for immigration reform to pass with the right bipartisan leadership. Maura Liasson spoke about the hardliner-obstructionists and the upcoming demonstrations having a possibe positive affect on the future of reform. Krauthammer blames Democrats for obstruction. [Blah.] He said Republicans are "stuck" on the "Amnesty word." He thinks the entire bill is a mess. [I'd ask him to look at "the mess" in this country presently because of a broken immigration system and suggest that we do the best we can by passing a bill that eliminates the mean spirit that Bill Kristol spoke about. Complaining will get us nowhere.]

Harry Taylor - American Icon

Harry Taylor - American Icon





*credits and text to follow

Leaker in Chief

"If there's a leak out of this administration, I want to know who it is."

- G.W. Bush

Bush Misleads Again

Bush Misleads Again
He's got to be nuts if he thinks we believe it's all Harry Reid's fault

Immigration reform has fallen victim to severely divided ideology among members of the Republican party. Yesterday, the measure in the Senate was shelved because of Even Senator John McCain voted "NO" to the Hagel-Martinez amendment because of differences in philosophy that transcended party lines. Rather than following party lines, the Senate vote followed the line of individual conscience. Finally, the Senate was acting in a way in which they should have been acting for the past five years (when istead, Republicans were Bush's "rubber stamp".)

So what does President Bush do? He blames Harry Reid and the Democrats!

He used his bully pulpit today to unfairly attack the Democrats. These days, that "bully pulpit" has been reduced to the corner Pinocchio is sent to when his nose begins to grow. Public polls show that he's not a credible leader. His words bounce off the walls of the isolated and marginalized corner he's created for himself. During his weekly radio address, Bush said:

"I call on the Senate minority leader to end his blocking tactics and allow the Senate to do its work and pass a fair, effective immigration reform bill."

Most Americans look at Bush today and understand that if he's moving his lips, it's a lie based on the one thing that has counted the most to him throughout his presidency: his own political gain and that of the Republican party. The rest of us are chopped liver. We're nothing to George W. Bush except punching bags with minds and mouths he regrets we were born with. This is just one more example that he will do or say  anything to divide America for his own political benefit. But it's backfiring. If he thinks we're buying it and that the Republican party has no responsibility or accountability for the divided part they've played, not only do I think he's despicable, but frankly I think he's tetched.

I certainly hope that the mainstream media would not fall into Bush's lie about Democratic obstruction. If they  perpetuate the lie, they are not doing the job the Fourth Estate is meant to do. Granted, Fox News will likely pick up the ball and run with the great lie because they are the 'Republican News Network.' If they do then they, like our own President, will be telling a political lie of which they should be morally ashamed.

The beauty is (at least my HOPE is), the majority of America is on to their lies.

Iran and U.S. on a Path to Unnecessary Danger?

Iran and U.S. on a Path to Unnecessary Danger?

"I think Iran has a secret nuclear-weapons program—I believe it, but I don’t know it." - Richard Amrmitage to Seymour Hersh during G.W. Bush's first term

Seymour Hersh has written a very important story about the pros and cons of Washington going to war with Tehran.Read it here. I'll start with a quote from a European diplomat. If you, like Harry Taylor of Charlotte, North Carolina, are deeply concerned and perhaps even afraid of the decisions coming from the Bush administration, pay close attention to this:

"Everyone is on the same page about the Iranian bomb, but the United States wants regime change," a European diplomatic adviser told me. He added, "The Europeans have a role to play as long as they don’t have to choose between going along with the Russians and the Chinese or going along with Washington on something they don’t want. Their policy is to keep the Americans engaged in something the Europeans can live with. It may be untenable.."[..]"If the diplomatic process doesn’t work, there is no military ‘solution.’ There may be a military option, but the impact could be catastrophic." [my emphasis]

If you remember the lead-up to the Iraq war, you will be very disturbed to see what is currently happening in D.C.:

In recent weeks, the President has quietly initiated a series of talks on plans for Iran with a few key senators and members of Congress, including at least one Democrat. [my emphasis - and gee, I wonder if that lone Dem might be Joe "Hawk-o" Lieberman of Connecticut?] A senior member of the House Appropriations Committee, who did not take part in the meetings but has discussed their content with his colleagues, told me that there had been “no formal briefings,” because “they’re reluctant to brief the minority. They’re doing the Senate, somewhat selectively.” [my emphasis - as always, keeping our representatives out of the loop based on partisan considerations]

The House member said that no one in the meetings “is really objecting” to the talk of war. “The people they’re briefing are the same ones who led the charge on Iraq. [my emphasis] At most, questions are raised: How are you going to hit all the sites at once? How are you going to get deep enough?” (Iran is building facilities underground.) “There’s no pressure from Congress” not to take military action, the House member added. “The only political pressure is from the guys who want to do it.” [my emphasis] Speaking of President Bush, the House member said, “The most worrisome thing is that this guy has a messianic vision.”

This is no way to lead our country to another possible war. The method is secretive, unAmerican and wanton. I'm beginning to think that the President is truly deranged - he certainly cares little for the rule of law or the spirit of the Constitution - and I am extremely worried for our nation. Those who do not voice objections are either gutless or codependents in his Messiah complex.

The Bush administration are diplomatically retarded. An adviser shows us that the foreign policy road we're on - good at threatening manly violence/crappy at diplomacy - is a pathway to potential catastrophe and that we can change now or risk WWIII. If they continue down this path, get your sons and daughters ready for the draft, because they'll be desperately needed

“The whole internal debate is on which way to go”—in terms of stopping the Iranian program. It is possible, the adviser said, that Iran will unilaterally renounce its nuclear plans—and forestall the American action. “God may smile on us, but I don’t think so. The bottom line is that Iran cannot become a nuclear-weapons state. The problem is that the Iranians realize that only by becoming a nuclear state can they defend themselves against the U.S. Something bad is going to happen.”

Deja vu all over again?

The Administration’s case against Iran is compromised by its history of promoting false intelligence on Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction. In a recent essay on the Foreign Policy Web site, entitled “Fool Me Twice,” Joseph Cirincione, the director for nonproliferation at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, wrote, “The unfolding administration strategy appears to be an effort to repeat its successful campaign for the Iraq war.”

Michel Samaha, a veteran Lebanese Christian politician and former cabinet minister in Beirut, told Mr. Hersh that an Iranian retaliation against a U.S. attack might be focused on exposed oil and gas fields in Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Kuwait, and the United Arab Emirates.

“They would be at risk,” he said, “and this could begin the real jihad of Iran versus the West. You will have a messy world.”

Tracey Schmitt Sinks Low

Tracey Schmitt Sinks Low

This snarky remark from Republican National Committee spokeswoman Tracey Schmitt might have been cute if the inept hypocrite who was leading her party didn't have zero credibility with the American public. Instead of sassy, it was ass-y.

"John Kerry deserves credit for continuing to take himself so seriously, despite the fact that no one else does."

You might think a representative of the party of Bush might be a tad more cautious and realistic at a time when the levels on the public confidence meter are eating dust. But no. She's appealing to the three people who still trust Bush. Maybe she's pissed off about the Harry Taylor thing in Charlotte yesterday. The bruises are showing.

China Browsing For Boeings

China Browsing For Boeings

From Stratfor.com:

Chinese Vice Premier Wu Yi is leading a delegation of Chinese companies to the United States on April 6 that intend to sign contracts totaling $15 billion with U.S. companies. Among the U.S companies China is looking to do business with are Boeing Co., General Electric Co., Microsoft Corp., General Motors Corp., Ford Motor Co. and DaimlerChrysler AG. This move comes after U.S. President George W. Bush's demand that China increase its investment in U.S. goods and services to attempt to even out the U.S.-China trade deficit.

More from China Daily.

China will be seeking additional business with General Electric. I wonder what they'll be looking for? What is it about the thought of increased business with American weapons systems experts - for the political sake of shrinking the trade deficit - combined with these two words that cause me to shiver?

China. Nuclear.

From Investors.com:

The Energy Department predicts China's nuclear energy will double between 2010 and 2015, outpacing single-digit growth in mature economies. General Electric, (GE) Siemens (SI) and Mitsubishi are chasing deals with Chinese power companies in Shanghai and the southwestern industrial city of Dongfang. Says Chi Ping Chen of Cap Gemini in Beijing: "With more than 25 sites planned for the 15 years . . . China is the center of the global nuclear power industry."

Oy. The blind trust is brethtaking, in light of all we hear from the Bush administration about mushroom clouds and evildoers.

Look at what Australia is doing:

Australia on Monday signed an agreement with China, allowing the Asian giant to buy uranium to feed its fast-developing nuclear energy sector. Because uranium also can be used to fuel nuclear weapons, the deal is a sensitive one, and the Australian government sought to play down concerns that the sale would have any impact on China's nuclear arsenal. Foreign Minister Alexander Downer said supplying China with uranium would not make "the slightest difference" to Beijing's nuclear weapons program. [Yeah. Right.

Forbes reports that two-way trade between Saudi Arabia and China passed the $14 billion mark in the first 11 months of last year--a nearly 60% increase over the same period a year earlier and nearly nine times the figure six years ago. Neither country breaks down trade figures by category, but the rising price of oil and petrochemicals, and a jump in Chinese demand, accounts for much of the increase, according to Samuel Blatteis, a Fulbright Fellow researching Gulf-China energy relations. The two countries didn't have much of a relationship until 1985, when Saudi Arabia turned to China for ballistic missiles after Washington wouldn't provide them.
[content taken from the Forbes article].

In other news from China, police yesterday confirmed that 121 skulls found in the the western part of Northwest China's Gansu Province were human and had been hacked from their bodies after death. [warning: graphic photo]

Immigration and the Catholic Conscience

Immigration and the Catholic Conscience

"No human being is ever to be reduced to being totally or even primarily identified by the color of their skin, their country of origin, their legal status or any other external characteristic. Every human being is first and foremost a person. "

Vincentian Father Richard Benson is academic dean and professor of moral theology at St. John's Seminary, Camarillo. He offers a Catholic perspective on Immigration.

Immigration: Senate Compromise Likely To Sink Bill in Hardline House

Immigration: Senate Compromise Likely To Sink Bill in Hardline House

Steve Soto has my favorite commentary on today's Senate Immigration Reform compromise. It's title: 'Immigration Deal Reached - GOP Will Be The Loser.'

Bloomberg News' Nicholas Johnson reports that Rep. Tom Tancredo is having a hissy fit about the compromise.

Colorado Republican Representative Tom Tancredo, chairman of the 96-member House Immigration Reform Caucus, called the compromise "miserable public policy."

"I do not believe that a plan of this nature can pass the House," he said.

Senate Democrats said they would support the Senate compromise as long as it isn't undermined by amendments that are too harsh and they have commitments that it won't be significantly changed in negotiations with the House."

Nicholas Johnson also shows how these Republicans just cannot be trusted - not even by their own statesmen-colleagues.

"We're trying to figure out some mechanism by which we can have an assurance that the bill that we've agreed to is actually the bill that gets voted on and is the bill that the president signs,'' Democrat Barack Obama of Illinois said.