The Trail: A Daily Diary of Campaign 2008

Well, it seems we have another so called journalist who has used their blog to demonstrate that they have neither the 'time nor the legal training' to comprehend anything having to do with FISA.
Seriously - have you done any research on this topic in general and Sen. Dodds courageous actions Tuesday? I mean, other than taking notes at cocktail parties?

It's the Constitution and the Rule of Law, stupid!

Don't bother trying to explain to this Mr/s Murray why Dodd's move was so important. She's probably too dense to realize the implications anyways. Nowadays all it takes to be considered an "expert" or "analyst" on any topic is a degree from the right school. Did anyone catch that story about CNN looking for applicants for a job covering environmental policy - the ad says knowledge of environment issues is a plus but not required! Even though I'm not supporting Dodd for President, I salute him for taking a stand whereas the mainstream media, television/cable and print, just bends over and lets Bush have his way.

Your work is a disgrace, Shailagh Murray.

For this you went to J-school -- to ridicule a senator who stands up for the rights and privacy of the American people?

I can't imagine how life went so tragically offtrack for you, but you should be ashamed of yourself. Either correct what's gone so badly wrong or find some other occupation.

Dodd showed great leadership and should be majority leader or a VP.

He is the opposite of cheney and addington who do not support the rule of law and the Constitution like they swore on the Bible to do.

We need more leaders like Dodd.

"Breathless" indeed. Not even a hint of objective reporting in this "article".

This is an astonishingly revealing bit of propaganda masquerading as journalism. Fundamental constitutional rights and the specific protections established to protect those rights (established following Watergate, no less) were here subverted by the administration and specific private actors. At one time, the Washington Post apparently gave two figs for the subversion of the US Constitution and rule of law - say, during the Watergate years - but now such considerations are merely "hot rhetoric".

For shame, Shalaigh Murray. For shame, Washington Post.

In disgust,
Richard Malloy

Senator Dodd stood up for the Constitution and Bill of Rights for us today. While Senators Biden, Clinton and O Bama said they would support a filibuster of the Senate Bill reported out of the Intelligence Committee, only Dodd returned from Iowa to defend the Bill of Rights today, against the telecom immunity provisions, which the Senate Judiciary Committee and House of Represenatives had previously rejected.

There is no need for telecom immunity. The FISA Court is open around the clock and warrantless surveillance is already allowed for 72 hours, before a FISA warrant is required. The FISA Court has only denied 4 requests, in over 10,000.

Senators who were allowed to view the flimsy Bush Administration legal arguments for telecom immunity, concluded telecom immunity appears intended to protect the criminal Bush administration from their illegal actions.

Hopefully, the Senate will defeat this blatant, unjustified attack on our Bill of Rights, Constitution and freedom, next year.

Fortunately Senators Kennedy, Feingold, Biden, and Durbin, of the Senate Judiciary Committee are on the record in opposition to telecom immunity, along with presidential candidates Dodd, Clinton and O'Bama. Senators Leahy, Spector and Feinstein, also Judiciary Committee members, are demanding more records.

We must make this a presidential campaign issue, to insure it receives adequate press to prevent corrupt backroom deals.

We need 10 votes in the Senate Judiciary Committee to defeat telecom immunity, in the Committee.

Thank you Senators Kennedy, Feingold, Biden, Durbin, Leahy, Spector and Feinstein for demanding more information regarding the extent of the Administration's apparently illegal warrantless telecommunication surveillance.

Senator Thomas Dodd deserves a special thanks for his courageous patriotic action placing a Senators hold on this apparently Unconstitutional immunity bill.

Alberto Gonzales apparently attempted to obstruct justice by preventing investigation of this surveillance program.

BTW, I feel the criticism of Ms. Murray and the Washington Post is excessively harsh. It should be obvious to anyone who reads newspapers, that the telecom companies, including ATT and Verizon advertise heavily, in them. Bringing this backroom deal to light and even uploading all of the criticism, in this thread reveals the Washington Post maintains some journalistic integrity.

I can't help but noticing that the readers of the WaPo (online anyway) really hate the WaPo and most of the WaPos writers. We could go after their advertisers but most of them are Arms Dealers and Manufacturers who want a propaganda outlet and are willing to pay big bucks for it. So basically the WaPo and much of their staff are accessories to war crimes. Little Eichmanns and graduates of the prestigious Goebbels School of Journalism.

Shailagh Murray _ A Mind as Ugly as Her Name. Perfect for the WaPo.

Glenn Greenwald
Thursday October 18, 2007 04:45 EST
AT&T, other telecoms, buy victory in lawsuits
(updated below)

(*****UPDATE II -- DODD TO PLACE A SENATE "HOLD" ON TELECOM AMNESTY BILL)

(Update III)

The fact that this was completely predictable does not make it any less reprehensible:

Senate Democrats and Republicans reached agreement with the Bush administration yesterday on the terms of new legislation to control the federal government's domestic surveillance program, which includes a highly controversial grant of legal immunity to telecommunications companies that have assisted the program, according to congressional sources. . . .

The draft Senate bill has the support of the intelligence committee's chairman, John D. Rockefeller IV (D-W.Va.), and Bush's director of national intelligence, Mike McConnell. It will include full immunity for those companies that can demonstrate to a court that they acted pursuant to a legal directive in helping the government with surveillance in the United States.

Such a demonstration, which the bill says could be made in secret, would wipe out a series of pending lawsuits alleging violations of privacy rights by telecommunications companies that provided telephone records, summaries of e-mail traffic and other information to the government after Sept. 11, 2001, without receiving court warrants. Bush had repeatedly threatened to veto any legislation that lacked this provision.

Let's just describe very factually and dispassionately what has happened here. Congress -- led by Senators, such as Jay Rockefeller, who have received huge payments from the telecom industry, and by privatized intelligence pioneer Mike McConnell, former Chairman of the secretive intelligence industry association that has been demanding telecom amnesty -- is going to intervene directly in the pending lawsuits against AT&T and other telecoms and declare them the winners on the ground that they did nothing wrong. Because of their vast ties to the telecoms, neither Rockefeller nor McConnell could ever appropriately serve as an actual judge in those lawsuits.

Ms. Murray,

I appreciate you alerting the citizenry to Senator Dodd's courageous stand against another devious attempt to obstruct justice, and illegally repeal our constitutional rights, by the corrupt Bush regime.

Your failure to provide a more objective perspective, by failing to report that the NSA began illegally approaching telecom companies by Feb. 27, 2001, over six months prior to the infamous Sept. 11 attack, has brought your objectivity into question.

Please rehabilitate your objectivity, by continuing to expose those involved in this blatantly corrupt, illegal and unconstitutional attack on our Bill of Rights. Please report the campaign contributions of the telecom companies seeking immunity for their illegal warrantless searches.

Many of us realize that the corporate advertisers do pressure newspapers to not publish articles critical of them and the Washington Post may receive considerable revenue from telecom advertisements.

Many of us also subscribe to publications, such as Washington Monthly, or Nation, which do not compromise their journalistic integrity, by accepting lucrative corporate advertising. We will be far more likely to financially support the corporate press, when they resume their civic role as watchdogs, not lapdogs.

The Washington Post played a pivotal role in exposing the corruption of the Nixon Presidency and the obstruction of justice committed by Nixon and his staff.

The Washington Post did publish an informative series, investigating Richard Cheney's role in unconstitutionally expanding Presidential power.

Our nation needs the Washington Post to stand up again, against the far more severe corruption, obstruction of justice and blatant violations of numerous federal laws, the Bill of Rights and our Constitution, committed by Bush, Cheney and Rice.

Every American who cherishes freedom will agree with Senator Dodd's courageous action. Finally we have a Senator representing the citizens!

This is the best news, since the resignation of corrupt Alberto Gonzales, who obstructed justice, by attempting to cover up this blatant, illegal, impeachable violation of the fourth amendment and the FISA Act.

It is no longer possible for anyone to intelligently and honestly deny that George Bush should be impeached for blatant violations of the Constitution.

December 14, 2005

Bush and the Constitution
"Just a Go**amned Piece of Paper"
By GARY LEUPP

Doug Thompson, publisher of Capitol Hill Blue, says he's talked to three people present last month when Republican Congressional leaders met with President Bush in the Oval Office to talk about renewing the Patriot Act. That act, passed by legislators who hadn't read it, in the immediate aftermath of 9-11 (when most people were shell-shocked and lawmakers in particular disinclined to use their brains), has of course been criticized as containing unconstitutional elements. All three GOP politicians quote their president as saying: "Stop throwing the Constitution in my face! It's just a go**amned piece of paper!"

At least one of Thompson's sources says the president, when told his insistence on preserving some provisions of the act could further alienate conservatives following the Harriet Miers Supreme Court nomination disaster, stated, "I don't give a go**amn: I'm the President and the Commander-in-Chief. Do it my way."

Nationwide demonstrations for Impeachment are scheduled for Saturday, October 27, 2007. If you can not attend an Impeachment demonstration, at least display a pro impeachment bumper sticker on your automobiles.

Please sign the Impeachment petitions, on the internet at http://www.impeachbush.org/site/PageServer,http://www.usalone.com/cheney_impeachment2.php or another website and contact your Congressional representatives and demand Impeachment of Bush and Cheney.

Hey Shailagh -
YAAAAWN!
Hahahahahaha! LOL!

Glenn Greenwald for president!

Hey Murray, I came over and read your piece from a link at Greenwalds' blog at Salon. He said about you, "She helpfully packs every decadent, petty and rotted attribute of the Beltway journalist into one single reporter." After reading your piece, I have to agree with him. Plus I just donated to Chris Dodd, a candidate that was never really on my radar before now. Bwaaaahhaahaa.

Is it not conceivable that Dodd is simply acting with straightforward and simple integrity in attempting to prevent the erosion of the 4th Amendment?

Is it the view of this columnist that any political action can only be motivated by a calculated self-interest?

allow me to join in the chorus of opprobrium. This article tells us nothing about Senator Dodd and everything about the sad, debased and puerile state of the media. You do not have the ability to distinguish between the genuine and the ersatz and I doubt that it matters to you. What seems to matter is a snarky, dismissive, insider tone and your exquisite cynicism.

Congrats - you exhibit the requisite qualities of of a Beltway Journalist. Go wash the feet of Walter Pincus.

I first want to say that i am a Democrat.I used to be a republican,but bush made me a Democrat.I am proud of the fact that Senator Dodd is standing up for the constitution.You should cheer for him,not mock him.If i could,i would donate to his campaign also. Go Senator Dodd,there is a lot of support for you in this country.Amen

My reaction to this news, like many people in the country who are extremely concerned about the damage Bush & co have done to the constitution- was to immediately go to Dodd's website and make a contribution.
I do not know who I will support for president but I think it shows much more leadership to stay in Washington and fight for the constitution than to pay lip service and do NOTHING, as all the other senators who are presidential candidates are doing.
Thank God at least SOMEONE is paying attention. I think it would be very interesting for Ms. Murray to do a follow up to this post and find out just how off she was in her report. The sarcasm and snide remarks were way off.
WAKE UP!

Dodd was "breathless" and his rhetoric got "hotter" by the moment. But was what he said correct? Has the president violated a fundamental, precious right? Only if you believe in the Fourth Amendment and the rule of law. It's revealing to see that the Washington Post doesn't.
You guys are a joke.

I produce better "journalism" than this every morning.

Then I push the handle on the tank, and my little journalistic masterpiece swirls down the drain.

No big loss, though. I'll just make another tomorrow. Just like Shailagh will.

Is Murray for real? Is this the work of a serious-minded political reporter, or a Gannon-style flak from Drudge's stable of GOP spinmonkeys?

I would vote for Dodd before I vote for either Clinton or Obama based on this one move on his part to block the passage of the FISA bill and the Bush Administration's successful war on the Constitution (the only success he's had to date).

For a political reporter to be so OUT OF TOUCH with the people of this country is not as remarkable as the fact that Murray seems to take such delight in being a tool.

Oh, my god. Little Debbie is right for once: the Post does have a readership of intelligent people who can think for themselves.

Too bad about the criminally stupid reporters.

I join the chorus of disappointment about this column, albeit for a different reason. Ms. Murray is wasting our time with these trivialities, when she could be telling us how much Senator Dodd's haircut cost.

The fact that is woman is the Post's "National Political Reporter" and can't get beyond snide gossipy tripe like this tells you all you need to know about the decline of the press.

Enjoy your continued slide into irrelevance.

Thanks Senator! (Ms Murray, good luck in any future endeavours)

As a person who considered himself a lifelong Republican from a family of Repubs, I just don't recognize the party anymore. I'm not sure when it changed, but it resembles little of what I had thought it stood for growing up. Now it seems to be the party of the war machine, big business, whacked out religious idiots, homophobes, pedophiles, and frankly, liars and other assorted criminals. Needless to say I haven't voted Republican for a long time.

After reading through most of the comments above, and not a single positive one for the article or the writer; I'm left scratching my head in wonder how the press could be so off track with what the views of the American public.

Thirty-percenter's aside, I think the public is crying out for a paper that just prints the news. In this day and age it may not possible, with whacked out Murdoch types owning everything; who don't really seem to care if their papers make money or not, just as long as they keep the powerful and incompetent in place. I also think a paper that actually had a liberal bias could make a fortune. Until one comes around we have to suffer with right-tilted bi-partisanship of the WaPo and NYT's. At least we know where the most of the reports stand. The Liberal Bias in the media is such a joke.

As for the article by Ms. Murray, I'm left wondering how her editor let that piece run and how she (and the editor) still has a job. They should be ashamed. Too bad we no longer have reports like Murrow and Cronkite.

You're a moron, Ms. Murray.

You have not the intelligence to understand the implications of the pending bill in question, nor the values to care about its implications. Cynicism is not a synonym for impartiality.

You are a disgrace to your profession.

You're seriously mocking a presidential candidate for risking his standing in the polls to defend the Constitution? Seriously?

Who wrote this? A twelve-year-old?

I note that Miss Murray has nothing but scorn and contempt for Sen. Dodd. How interesting. Whatever Dodd's motives, he is one of the few people in the government right now (another would be Sen. Feingold, who is *also* regularly scorned by the "sophisticated" Washington press) who is actually defending our Constitutional rights. But to Miss Murray, that doesn't matter; he's just being "breathless" and engaging in "hot rhetoric."

Further, Miss Murray is implying--quite stridently--that Dodd is being silly by making his stand "blocking a bill that doesn't exist yet." I can't decide if Murray is really so ignorant of Washington politics--the time to stop a bill is *before* it goes to the floor, Shailagh!--or if she thinks her *readers* are that ignorant. Perhaps I should flip a coin.

I wonder too if Murray's sneering attitude is due to the fact that this is the 4th Amendment we're talking about; would she be so dismissive if it was the 1st Amendment, and her right to blather was being threatened? Let me clue you, Shailagh; by the time the 1st Amendment reaches this stage, it will already be too late. How long do you think the Bush Administration and the right wing will wait to declare any non-supporters of the war as "aiding terrorists," and take away their rights to publish?

Good luck with your shtick, honey; it's days are numbered.

Ms. Murray, you may be dismissive of Senator Dodd, but I'm one of the people who contributed to the over $100,000 his campaign raised in the 24 hours since he placed a hold on the bill. This the U.S. Constitution we're talking about. There are still those of us in this country who think that it and the principles it articulates are worth defending, and we will support those leaders who feel the same way. Your casual derision of this issue is shameful.

Yikes! Is this Fox News or the Wash Post?

Ms Murray may not care about protecting our freedoms, but I'll be we're all supposed to get worked up over press freedoms.

Senator Dodd deserves our gratitude for taking a bold stance against a misguided drift towards a police state.

All I can say is you are an idiot.

Shailagh,

don't let these losers get you down. They're all so worked up about that boring old constitution. That's like SO eighteenth century. And that Dodd dude is like so old and not even popular. Maybe you could get some of the cool candidates to pants him. That would be so awsome and you could write about it and everything. I never really enjoyed politics until I read your blog - its like so real and stuff.

By the way, since I know you (ho-ho) journalists live on anecdotal evidence (as opposed to facts), here's an anecdote for you. Until Dodd made his "breathless" announcement, my financial support went to the lanky Senator Conciliator from the great state of Broderland. As soon as I read about Dodd's action, I breathlessly headed over to his website and made a contribution. From here on out no other Democrat will receive another dime from me as long as they enable this FISA outrage. And I don't care how many times they trot Dianne Feinstein out there to tell us about all the scary stuff she's read behind closed doors. Enough is enough!

To guzmann:

re: "writing for The Washington Pest has really taken away your ability to perceive reality"

What I think you misunderstand is that reality perception (whether or not an understanding of the 4th. amendment exists) is no longer a requirement to write for the WAPO.

What I don't understand is how Froomkin and Priest remain employed there. I am thankful, however, for their anomalous employment at this once-proud fish wrap.

To Scientician

Unfortunately, we all know Ms. Clueless will be unable to "rethink (her) perspective on these issues". She and her colleagues (at the WAPO, and others within the beltway MSM and the Capitol Hill cocktail society) will remain immune to any true journalistic integrity or meaningful introspection.

After all, she can take comfort in the fact that nothing she said here will subject her to the "furious glares of colleagues".

This piece of schlock and her cumulative "work product" to date suggest that nothing else really matters.

Sorry Ms Murray.

Looks like writing for The Washington Pest has really taken away your ability to perceive reality and your understanding of the 4th Amendment (if you ever had any).

The 4th Amendment is so boring! YAAWWN! Can you write about the candidates' haircuts and clothing? That's, like, way more important to the Horse Race.

Seriously, Shailagh, you're a joke.

Well I didn't read every comment but everything I wanted to say has already been said.

If you do have the honesty to respond to this spate of well deserved criticism, I ask that you not do the predictable hack thing, and find one or two comments that use dirty words to dismiss the lot of the criticism as more rude extremist left wing netroots activists as Joe Klein has done under similar circumstances.

You wrote a terrible piece of journalism here, and you clearly need to rethink your perspective on these issues.

There really is no excuse for the Washington Post to be publishing this snide nonsense.

The basic rule in this country is that in the absence of exigent circumstances, judges should approve searches. Even the compliant FISA court was too big a hurdle for the Bushies.

Dodd is not going to be President, he is too much of a gasbag Senator, but it is heartening that one of the Democrats refused to compromise away the Constitution in the face of the administration's scare tactics.

The Post should be ashamed.

Glenn Grenwald takes Ms Murray to the woodshed:
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2007/10/20/kurtz_murray/index.html

Is there anything at all that will get a reporter dismissed from this paper? Anything?

As an alumnus of the Columbia Graduate School of Journalism, I can say without reservation that Shailagh Murray is a tool and a hack. She would have been kicked out of my reporting 101 class in about 10 minutes. Yeah Murray, nice work all the way around. You're a joke and a disgrace to your profession. Thanks for making me shoot my coffee out of my nose.
Sincerely,
Gary Mortenson
Mpls, MN

Phrases like "the rhetoric got hotter" and "furious glares of colleagues" makes me wonder if you're passing off something written for a junior high-school newspaper. Apparently Senator Dodd isn't a member of your clique. How awful that must be for him. Do you realize the damage you do when you trivialize important matters like blatant law breaking and focus instead on the superficial?

Rather than this mindless drivel why don't you make an actual effort to address the substance of the issue?

Dear Ms. Murray,

It's kind of a shame that some around here are so legitimately incensed about your revolting post that they use admittedly foul language and rude sexual innuendoes to express their disgust. (Like all liberals, I'll be the first to exclaim that I've seen far more egregious abuse from the 'Right Wing'... the hilarious point of my evident bias, however, is that you've absolutely surrendered your authority to call me out as "prejudiced," lol.)
In my response to Mr. Dodd's bravery on his website, I wrote something along the lines of "Thank you for your efforts to keep our democratic nation - This Current Government - from taking yet another giant step toward fascism.

"Fascism."

Now there's a word for you to look up in your dictionary...
Considering the context of your offensive snark, I consider that word to constitute a far more offensive - and applicable - word and image than any of the abusive imagery than even the most vociferous rebuttals on this page.

The Post once hired (& shortly thereafter fired) a lying, plagiarizing right winger to write a blog meant to counter the energetic and illuminating Mr. Froomkin, whose work has been just about the last remaining beacon of truth-seeking in the entire paper.

Why don't you apply for the job?

You've demonstrated - once again - that you'd be a perfect candidate (except, perhaps, regarding the qualification that you actually do genuine research and intelligently report on the facts and history behind those facts).
Then again... the job posting does call for a representative of the Bush-following twenty-something percent of the citizenry...

Thank You!

The idiocy on display here is staggering. If Ms. Murray didn't cover her beat as if she were filling a slam book using a feathered glitter pen, she might watch and learn what it means to have the courage of one's convictions.

Given that she has neither (forget both) it's easy to see why she doesn't get what Dodd's doing at all.

(I cancelled my Post subscription three years ago and while some of the reporting is still top notch, it's crap "coverage" like this that led me to cancel and that I don't miss one bit.)

There was a time during Watergate when I felt The Washington Post had some sense of the Constitution. I too cheered when Senator Dodd announced he was placing a hold. Silly me.

Really, responding to these points as if they have merit, while valiant, seems to me not to be worth the effort. I'm more interested in the meta- of it all.

What I mean is, whenever I read something this banal and lame, and then over 100 comments below the piece, all negative, I wonder what the writer says to him/herself to rationalize why his/her entire audience thinks he/she is a moron.

With rightwing blogs, sure, the content is just as inane, but at least there is a like-minded audience there to offer instant validation for whatever drivel the author is leaking out onto the internet. But what about someone who works at such a supposedly prestigious newspaper, read by thousands of people from different points along the ideological continuum?

How pathetic must the writer feel when hundreds of people tell him/her daily what an idiot he/she is, and not one single commenter sticks up for the garbage they wrote? Ever? It must be a pretty lousy feeling.

Is the the Washington "Moon" Times or the Washington Post? Just asking.

Give her a break, she can't think and paint her nails at the same time.

Murray's writing is sort of an insane amalgam of Judy Miller's uncritical parroting of Bush Administration Talking Points mixed with seventh-grade-level Dowd-ish snark. Sad that WaPo opinion-meisters (at the Politics Desk?), like Murray, have to borrow voices from The New York Times? And yet do it so shabbily? Marks another low in the shameful decline of a once great and proud newspaper.

Wong on the tone.
Wrong on the politics.
Wrong on the patriotism.

Forget about God bless America. God save us from these fools.

Please tell me it isn't so. Dems do it again.

Our liberties are getting screwed.

Would you vote for a presidential candidate that votes to grant legal immunity to telecoms that participated in the illegal surveillance of Americans?

---> http://www.youpolls.com/details.asp?pid=740
.

Constitution?

YAWWWN.

Shailagh,

Do you even notice that you end this piece by criticizing a Senator for perhaps actually having to spend a week IN THE SENATE.

This is really a terrible little piece of reporting. Completely ignores the issue at hand retroactive immunity for breaking the law.

A well deserved winner of the wanker of the day.

What a pathetic exercise in completely unwarranted arrogance.

Well, Shailagh, you huffed and puffed about Dodd being "breathless" and you (mis)characterized his statement as mere "rhetoric" which was getting "hotter" but you neglected to provide any actual argument as to how you arrived at these odd assessments.

When you cut through the fog of rhetoric you have provided here, your snotty little comments boil down to the suggestion that Dodd is an irrational liar -- irrational because overwhelmed by emotion and a liar because his statement is just rhetoric, meant only to persuade irrespective of the logic and the evidence.

But Dodd has the logic and the evidence on his side. If you cared about your country at all, you would refrain from these kind of witless attacks on patriots who are trying desperately to keep this country tethered to its own most fundamental and basic values.

This is yet another example showing to the whole world how the Washington Post has become Pravda on the Potomac. And you're just as believable

Awful, awful journalism.

I too find it highly disturbing that civil libertarians are constantly forcing the "Constitution" down our throats. And now comes this uppity, breathless, do-gooder Senator getting on that same tired old "Constitution trumps the absolute arbitrary authority of the king" - "rule of law" bandwagon.

What the hell kind of country are these radical, far-left-loon Americanists and all their "Constitution" this and "Bill of Rights" that talk going to leave us? With cells of wild-eyed terrorists and liberals lurking everywhere our only chance is hysteria, abandonment of our liberties, and blind submission to authority.

I'm not quite sure why I couldn't fight the urge to support the Senator by sending money in support of the block. Damn high school civics classes and pride in our core principles must be kicking in. Drats.

Think of Ms. Murray as the fat girl who used to make fart noises and laugh uproariously in your high school civics class.

Then she grew up and wrote this column.

Shalaigh,You are a joke. Try reporting instead of partisan pontificating or give it up for the stand-up circuit because you're a hack. Your smarmy attitude just reinforces your bias on a daily basis.

Patrick in the city

PS: how many times this year do we have to listen to "dear leader" threaten to veto a bill that hasn't been passed yet? Dodd did more to try to restore our civil rights than the entire republican party. You stink!

"Breathlessly" standing for the Constitution and the rule of law in the Senate? What a foolish thing to do! He should be in Iowa shaking hands in retirement homes.
If the Washington Post gig doesn't work out, you should apply for political correspondent on the Daily Show.

Shalaigh, several months ago I stopped participating in all Post politics discussions that involve you because I was so frustrated with the way you dismiss readers' questions with sarcastic remarks, and proffer answers which you clearly haven't thought about for more time than it took to type the sentence. I gained from these "discussions" the impression that you care less about finding truth than you care about being part of a little club of reporters and staffers on Capitol Hill who are some wretched combination of self-important, cynical and lazy. You're an "insider"! You know how things "really" happen or don't happen! That appears to be the mindset that prevents you from either investigating and thinking about new news on the Hill or taking the questions and comments of people outside your little club seriously.

Your "breathless" description of Dodd above is similarly arrogant and facile. It wouldn't earn a "B" in a Journalism 101 class either for style or substance.

Please do better!

Ms Murray: this is junk journalism at its finest. Not the first time you try to be smart alecky. Pity, that, because the FISA bill as proposed does have flaws. But, of course, it is easier to be snippy than serious. The latter requires time and the ability to analyse. No need to engage the brain.Have you caught this infection from your colleague?

How odd that Dodd would actually protect our privacy! In Murray's little bushian-authoritarian world, it is a cause for scorn and mockery. How about listening on your private phone conversations, honey? Or reading your private e-mails? Would you like that, little twit?

The next time you write something, do borrow the brain from someone who is actually able to think. You'll save yourselves the scorn and ridicule that is being heaped upon you.

Ms. Murray, so I guess it's OK that we've set up a secret webcam in your bedroom and have been beaming the feed to random sites on the Internet? Oh, no? You feel your privacy has been violated. How quaint.

You could sue...but ha hah - we have immunity now!

Angling for Maureen Dowd's job, are we?

Oh look, a senator is trying to defend
the "Constitution". My, isn't that
precious?

Have you got a SINGLE comment applauding
this "Heathers" post? Ever wonder why?

"Civil libertarians" is not the right word for people who have read the Constitution and want us to follow it.

The Congress, simply put, should not grant immunity from our judicial system to the telecoms. I am thrilled that Senator Dodd is standing up for our Constitution and the rule of law. Specifically, the Framers inserted the 4th Amendment, which is supposed to protect us from unreasonable and unlawful searches and seizures.

Ms. Murray should realize that our Constitution, to which all governmental officials take an oath to preserve, protect and defend, is a non-negotiable issue. Her juvenile unprofessional attacks on Senator Dodd are wrong and she should apologize forthwith.

Ms. Murray:

Are you thirteen?

Senate holds have been used over, and over, and over again by the Republicans for this entire session. Not only have they put on holds for essentially everything, they have threatened filibuster after filibuster on everything from the most mundane to the most important pieces of our legislation these past two years.

Where were you when this was happening? Nowhere. Where was the outrage? Accepted as standard operating procedure. Did you care? Obviously not. Were those bills somehow existent when they were put on hold by Republicans, but not when a Democrat does it? No, but that doesn't matter to you.

You're a hypocritical, easily manipulated moron who's a tool of Republican operatives. Seriously.

http://time-blog.com/swampland/2007/10/chris_dodd_the_netroots_show_t.html

This says it all. Some people do care when media carriers betray their trust to customers, violating their right to privacy. Dodd stood up for their right to privacy and he's been standing firm against the United States as perpetrators of torture. Some of us want to get back to what we thought our country stood for - in as big a hurry as we can.

You really should be more respectful of politicians who stand up for the Constitution. After all, it's the Constitution that protects your right to make a fool of yourself in public so often. If you lived in one of those countries that hate our freedoms, your scribblings would be confined to the walls of public rest rooms.

"The rhetoric got hotter with every paragraph" and the WaPo's readers get hotter with your posts. Dodd has my vote, should it come to that, for his courage in standing up for our constitution. Using that kind of snarky language makes your writing suspect. What did Dodd do that is so contemptible except stand up for the constituion? Breathless??? Gimme a break.

congrats !!

you won the coveted " Wanker of the Day " at atrios' eschaton blog for this really deep insightful stimulating post !!

keep up the good wanking !!

and buy a clue or two when you get a chance.

those clues would be in the aisle for Wankers Wanking.

Thanks for the info. I'm going over to Dod's campaign site to make a contribution.

your condescension is breathtaking

Actually, I think you've done everyone a favor. Your swipe is so blatant, so screamingly obvious to persuade anyone paying the slightest attention you are a third rate hack and first rate propagandist for the worst administration ever.

Well done Ms. Murray.

You should be ashamed. I remember when it used to be a big deal when laws were broken. Now you think it's funny that a Senator doesn't want to grant "retroactive immunity" for lawbreaking the extent to which we're not even allowed to know. Your readers seem to think the Constitution's worth something. Pity you'd rather take a weak slap at a someone who's trying to protect it.

Who did you blow to get this job?

Hey, Shailagh, why don't you just go get that job at Entertainment Tonight? I mean, that's really what you want to do, isn't it--be clever and sarcastic, and shallow?

I really do not understand people like you. Why do you cover politics when you are so disinterested in policy and have such cynical contempt for our American political process?

If you want to be a silly gossip columnist, go be one!

If you want to report on the government, you should realize that these things you regard as a joke have real life and death consequences to hundreds of millions of people.

You should realize that while, for whatever bizarre reason, you couldn't care less about what our government does, this stuff is actually important to millions of Americans.

We actually care. And what our government does actually effects us in real ways.

I, and I'm sure the rest of Americans like me, don't care if that means anything to someone like you. But I'm sure everyone like me who reads your appallingly frivolous articles about our government feels the same way I do:

If you don't want to be serious and intelligent, don't! No one's going to force you. But stop trying to reduce very serious and complicated issues down to junior high school cattiness.

Do us all a favor, yourself included, go write about Lindsey Lohan, would you?

Wow, right away the reader gets hit with that completely nonsensical "what a tool--the bill doesn't even exist yet, loser!" moment. And then of course there's the silly "breathless" remark. My guess is that many people couldn't even make it to the end, where we have probably the most revealing part of this post, the "glares" from the angry Senators. Could there be a better illustration of how reporters like her see everything through the lense of high school? Why is that? it's the strangest thing...

Funny, when in July conservative Republican Senator Grassley condemned George Bush for, as Grassley put it, promising to veto SCHIP legislation that hadn't been written yet, I don't remember such shock and contempt coming from this reporter.

Isn't it more inherently ridiculous for a President to do this than a Senator?

Isn't it a more newsworthy "man bites dog" conflict when the incident involves a leading Conservative Senator calling out a President of his same party than when...well..nobody calls out a Democrat?

Ms. Murray, great parody! I couldn't stop laughing. The sarcastic, mocking tone, the dismissal of the importance of stopping this disgraceful bill in its tracks, the disregard for the facts. Spot on! What a perfect send-up of how the right wing would respond to Dodd's announcement. You are quite clever. Great job!

So, by your logic, Clinton, Romney, Giuliani, Obama, etc., shouldn't be campaigning right now -- after all, they're not even their parties' presidential nominees yet!

Idiot.

First of all, you are a terrible, terrible political analyst! This is like 8th grade writing.

Dodd won my support today. I've been waiting for one of the Dems to step up and lead on pushing back against the assault against our basic rights as Americans which the Bush administration has championed. If Harry Reid is going to continue to absolutely refuse to lead in the Senate, I greatly appreciate Dodd stepping up and doing what needs to be done. Sometimes it takes one person showing some actual spine to get greater numbers to do the same. Leading is something you do by example. It doesn't matter what you say, if you don't do anything about it.

Chris Dodd stands as a real American; one that has a spine and a brain on top of it! If only other politicians would follow your plain spoken outrage we would talk about issues and not iconic politics. (By "iconic politics" I mean politics that focuses on symbolic issues devoid of substantive depth.) Please continue to deny further erosion of our country's Constitution by any one. Fascism must be eliminated and only by calling them on their despicable behavior will it be eliminated.

This is about the most ridiculous and slanted story I have read in a awhile... And that is saying something. What Chris Dodd is doing is commendable. I have to wonder what your agenda is in presenting the story in this manner.

Ms.Murray, please take that offered job at Fox news and stop sullying the reputation of this once great paper.

Shailagh Murray hates our civil rights.

Mrs. Devil: the beltway biotoxins in your blood are affecting your "thought" processes.

Dear Shailagh.

(May I call you Shailagh, dear?)

It's striking how out of touch the beltway media are with the rest of the WORLD.

Truly amazing.

Ease up people! Shailagh didn't know that the bill that wasn't a bill was a bill because when she wrote it wasn't a bill, she hadn't yet written that it was a bill. Simple, really. What a maroon.

67 comments and every single one of them questions your ability as a Washington post reporter.

The people have spoken. Get rid of this biased tool of the Republican right. Oh, thats right, the WAPO is still in support of the Iraq war. Put on your kneepads and slurp those Republican talking points right up, Ms. Murray.

i have been awaiting someone - ANYONE - particularly among the herd of 2008 presidential candidates to step forward and speak out forcefully about the constitutional crisis that our nation faces and has been facing since the scotus decision of 20 december 2000... this, in my humble opinion, is the most serious crisis the nation has ever faced and every day that it goes unaddressed, the future of our democratic republic is less and less assured... thank god dodd has found the cojones to stand up to the horror that is the bush administration... if you, shailagh murray, would skip over to time's swampland blog, you would see just exactly how dodd's effort has completely changed his dynamic in the race... evidently there are those who, like myself, appreciate a strong stance in support of our constitution...

http://takeitpersonally.blogspot.com/

I understand how you might have problems understanding that someone in Congress would put principle before the personal pursuit of political office. After all, it's a rare thing. Try not to criticize something with which you have no experience. It makes you look silly and petty. And, just to let you know. Snark is not your forte. Breathless, indeeed.

Stupidity, shallowness, condescension, and an inability to perform the most basic tasks required of the fourth estate - you sure hit for the cycle this time, bimbo. Just to be clear, no one commenting here really believes you make an honest attempt to report the news, hence the reason I won't label you a "reporter." "Journalist" captures your work so much better; after all, a journal is no more than one persons's private musings about the events that befall him or her. Keeping a journal requires no intelligence, insight, or objectivity; it is inherently a subjective navel-gazing exercise that amounts to masturbation with a writing implement. Congratulations, with this missive you have demonstrated your mastery of that art. You are officially the Michelangelo of mendacity, the Picasso of the puerile, and the Donatello of drivel. Youve now arrived: Broder would go down on you in a minute...

Broder & Cohen at least have the excuse of advanced senility. Can an intelligent person not see the huge disconnect between her first two paragraphs? Oh, right. W/ the exceptions of Froomkin & Priest, the Wa Po-Times doesn't employ intelligent people.

You actually get paid to write drivel like that?

Shailagh Murray is a Rovian political hack whose every writing is filled with bias. Her continued employment at Washpost is a sad reminder of how far the paper of Woodward and Bernstein has fallen into craven servile obeisance to the political right.

So protecting the people of the US against the kinds of searches that are explicitly banned by our Constitution is now viewed as shameless pandering. Amazing.

You need to get out in the country and attend fewer DC cocktail parties, Ms. Murray. Your beloved Bush is not well-liked by us real Americans.

Worst. Reporter. Ever.

This is a blog, not really journalism, so she can be free to attach Dodd for showing some integrity without being accused of poor journalism.

This is a terrible piece of journalism. You're insulting not only Senator Dodd but every American who supports his actions, and there are a lot of us.

Shailagh Murray, I normally skip over her section when reading WP blogs. I can see why. I am proud of Dodd for taking the American Freedom Pledge. It looks like Shailagh doesn't know what that is. American Freedom Pledge: 'We are Americans, and in our America we do not torture, we do not imprison people without charge or legal remedy, we do not tap people's phones and e-mails without court order, and above all we do not give any president unchecked power. I pledge to fight to protect and defend the Constitution from attack by any president.'

Well, according to -- ahem -- the New York Times, the Senate Select Intelligence Committee approved some sort of "bill" by a 13-2 vote yesterday that gave telecom companies immunity.

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/us/AP-Terrorist-Surveillance.html

Who knows if it'll run into any sort of trouble in Judiciary? That's a practically unanimous vote (six Democrats and seven Republicans for, only Wyden and Feingold against).

It may not be soup yet, but someone's opened the can.

Senator Dodd is a hero today, in a country that has been in criminally short supply of them lately. I, for one, applaud a member of Congress who actually wants to defend the Constitution for a change, rather than simply amend it (or ignore it) to make the White House's law-breaking behavior retroactively legal.

Ms. Murray, how do you sleep at night? How do you, in good conscience, accept a paycheck for writing the type of sneering drivel that you've penned in this condescending article?

Look. I don't expect you to value the constitution. You're only the "political" reporter. And I don't expect you to understand why anyone might object to Congress granting immunity to huge corporations for flat-out breaking the law without so much as requiring any of them to describe which crimes they have committed. We do that for criminals ALL the time, right?

But, as political reporter, I would expect you to note that there is a huge constitutency within the Democratic party looking for a candidate with courage, and if Dodd in fact can demonstrate himself to be that person, it'll do him a whole lot more good than another week on the hustings.

Nahhh... too much to expect...

Sometimes I just hang my head in shame. Maybe it's a secret Washington Post staff desire to get slammed by people for writing such sloppy posts. It's not like the details of the FISA bill wasn't also covered by the Washington Post or half the other newspapers in the United States.

Sado-Masochists anyone?

You are a terrible reporter. Honestly, you Washington DC reporters are so out of touch with what middle class and lower class Americans are going through right now, that I think you should all be summarily fired. I know a high school newspaper editor could do a better job than you and be much more objective. Take a two week vacation and then quit.

Why grant retroactive immunity for something this administration claimed was legal?
Something is rotten in Washington.
And Sen.Dodd is our knight. Thank you Senator, you make me proud to be American.
This is Mr. Smith goes to Washington stuff.

Pathetic, Shailagh.

Do you want to be a journalist, or a third rate MoDo?

The writer of this article is a genius, a genius I tell you.

"Dodd has raised more small-dollar contributions in the last 24 hours than he did in the previous month. Sevugan also says the number of visits to his website is up tenfold, as is the number of people registering their e-mail addresses there"

Oh good lord, what an insufferably snide and smug look at something this important. Beyond what the glaring flippancy says about your unspoken prejudices, it mostly begs the question "If not presidential law-breaking, then what DO you take seriously?" (Wait--don't tell me, Edwards' haircut? Hillary's cleavage?) That shallow, substance-free POV is the only one you're comfortable with, Murray.

I'm posting this now and grabbing an image of this entire page. I'm afraid that someone might say something uncivil and the thread will be disappeared with lots of "those terrible bloggers!"

It's 4:05 PDT here on the West Coast.

When people come back in time and see who was making snarky comments in the Media the day that Sen. Dodd stood up for the rule of law and the Constitution, we will all know what role --Shailagh Murray-- of the "liberal media" made.

And if people in the media at the Washington Post start crying about getting "beat up by the bloggers on the left" these comments should be compared to the kind of comments they get from the Right when they beat up the journalists. (When the bloggers on the right want to get you they come to your house and investigate your family life as well as make mean comments, so please, no pearl clutching over non-equal actions.)

We really want you to do your job, Ms. Murray in a way that focuses on the truth and not high-school "Maureen Dowd" analysis of what will happen to Dodd when he goes on the Senate floor.

Please, do a better job in the future.

Thank you for getting out the news about Senator Dodd's courageous stand. He has certainly gained my support in the Democratic primaries, and I just gave him a contribution.

The idea of the telecom companies using the money they got from us, their customers, to lobby Congress for immunity for illegally selling out the privacy of us, their customers, makes my blood boil. Go Senator Dodd!

Mrs. Murray, Senator Dodd's actions have given me tremendous respect for him. I find it disturbing how you consider the notion of principle to be quaint and old-fashioned, but I suppose that happens to most prostitutes eventually.

You are a ninny, Shailagh.

Dodd picked up more votes in the last 24 hours than he did in six months of glad handing at retirement homes.

It's really pretty simple. Shailagh Murray
is a GOP hack, so whatever a Democrat does is bad for him/her and good for the ruling junta.

The shame is not on Murray, who is doing her job (i.e. promoting the Republican Party and its works) The shame is on the Washington Post for employing her. If you want to direct insults at anyone, direct them at Donny Graham.

Sen. Christopher J. Dodd (D-Conn.) announced in a breathless press release

In other news: Shallow Washington Post "journalist" thinks it is funny for a Senator to defend the Constitution. Consulting her "Pravda Journalism for Dummies" handbook, the "journalist" noted that "only crazy people who should be laughed at, locked up, and/or shot complain about the State."

What a cynical little turd you are, Ms. Murray.

I hope you enjoy your weekend of cocktail weenies and self-congratulation with the political in-crowd that clearly sneers at the concerns of average Americans.

Ms. Murray is no MoDo and she should give up her MoDo affectations. It would never occur to Murray that Dodd, you know, feels strongly about getting to the truth? Honestly, Shailagh Murray reveals herself as an insulated and cynical mouthpiece for the right-leaning inside-the-Beltway press -- more a willing stenographer than an independent reporter.

Hooray for Dodd! It's nice to see someone stand up for the Country, the Constitution, and the Rule of Law.

Boo for Shailagh Murray! As a journalist, she should be pushing to find out what the telecoms did that they need amnesty for. Instead she mocks Dodd.

Shailagh Murray doesn't believe in the rule of law and doesn't know what good journalist is about.

I for one would like to see which Senators are glaring at Senator Dodd because they don't share his concerns -- any Senator who isn't concerned about the ongoing destruction of the Fourth Amendment and the trampling of the Rule of Law is a Senator who should not be in office. Didn't they all take an oath to support and defend the Constitution?

How pathetic it is for Ms. Murray to sneer at Senator Dodd for taking that oath seriously.

"blocking a bill that doesn't exist yet"

That's a remarkably stupid observation, given that you discuss said non-existent bill in the next few paragraphs.

Shouldn't a political opinion writer know the subject matter a bit better?

Here's a first for a Senate presidential candidate: blocking a bill that doesn't exist yet.

How silly of Dodd! He must be really delusional! Right there in your first paragraph you really nailed him for imagining a bill that doesn't exist! And then, in your third paragraph:

On Wednesday, a bipartisan group of Senators and the Bush administration reached a compromise on the politically charged bill

Well, if the REPUBLICANS say it exists, then it must exist. Top notch reporting on this bill that exists/doesn't exist.

I realize it would get you banned to the nerds' table in the Washington Post cafeteria, and Ceci Connelly would like, TOTALLY make fun of you behind your back for it and stuff, but did it ever like, occur to you that maybe a US Senator believes in the Constitution and the founding principles of the architecture of our government.

And stuff.

The only thing breathless here, Ms. Murray, is the airhead quality of your reporting. You should be ashamed of yourself for denigrating the only Senator with the courage to stand up to a criminal administration and it's corporate enablers. I made my first campaign contribution to Chris Dodd yesterday, and thanked him for his principled stand. Tripe like you've written here merely makes plain how utterly out of touch you and the rest of MSM are with what is going on in this country. To see how a professional reports news, try reading Glenn Greenwald's column over at Salon.

David Broder rules her world.

Ms. Murray:

"Here's a first for a Senate presidential candidate: blocking a bill that doesn't exist yet."

So, no sense in Bush blocking an Iranian nuclear threat that doesn't exist yet. Is that correct?

Initially encouraged to see an MSM contribution to the story that Senator Dodd vows to hold or filibuster the FISA bill containing telecom amnesty, I quickly discerned the disdain in Ms. Murray's column. Why? Is it the position of the Washington Post to sit by while the Constitution is being shredded? Spying on American citizens without warrants is illegal! THAT is the story, along with the fact that there is a congressperson brave enough to stand up to both the executive and legislative branches. Journalists: Do your job and report!

Senator Dodd must believe that there is one justice system that applies to equally to all. The president wants all his friends who break the law for him, like Libby and the telecoms, to get out of paying the price for their misdeeds. Worse yet, Harry Reid is giving the president all he wants. I don't know if he was a good boxer, but he has demonstrated he is a loser when fighting for the American people. It's disgusting.

what's with the sneer-word "breathless"?? you know perfectly well that's a right-wing buzz-word used to impugn the seriousness of anything they can't actually meet on the merits. Why don't you resign and go to work for the Daily Standard, if that's your definition of "analysis"?

The tone of your article is more evidence of our 4th estate fiddling, while the constitution burns.

Shame on you!

Senator Dodd is the one candidate who dares to stand up and be counted! How stupid to think he will somehow suffer politically for his courage and taking the lead to face down the Administration as it dismantles our Constitutional government. While most of us have been frozen in shock and most of our supposed representatives flounder or acquiesce in the ongoing treachery, Senator Dodd has offered to lead the majority of Americans who want to stop the Bush Administration before it's too late. He shows he deserves to have presidential ambitions! I never thought of him as outstanding until now, but now I think he is a hero.

Good for Chris Dodd!

It's about time someone in Congress actually stood up for the Constitution and tried to prevent this administration from continuing it's lawless behavior. What a pity that Ms. Murray could only offer snide, sarcastic comments about Mr. Dodd's courageous efforts. Can Ms. Murray really be that clueless about what this administration is up to with the FISA bill that she doesn't recognize the significance of what Mr. Dodd is trying to do?

Whenever that big day comes, Dodd -- as the keeper of the "hold" -- must return from the campaign trail to officially block debate on the bill.
That entails standing around on the Senate floor, forcing procedural votes, avoiding the furious glares of colleagues who don't share the same concerns.
The standard duration of such showdowns is about a week -- time that Dodd, who is trailing badly in early primary polls, can scarcely afford...Shaligh Murray.

Are you kidding me? If I was Dodd's campaign Manager I'd give my right arm for such a moment.

Your post about Dodd seems almost mocking in tone. It's as if 'how dare he' be confrontational and speak up about the lack of White House ethics...and especially, how dare he consider blocking this legislation from coming up for a vote.

You are out of touch with the feelings of the Democratic base.

I am a progressive blogger who has been entirely fed up with the party and now, for the first time, am considering Dodd as a candidate. In fact, I posted a direct link to his online petition.

Sounds to me like Sen. Dodd is one savvy candidate.

http://scootmandubious.blogspot.com

Go, Senator Dodd!!

You just don't get it do you?

I'm sensing something much larger here. Admittedly hopeful but this could be the moment where we all go to the window...

"I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it anymore!"

We've been clamoring for years for someone like Dodd to stand up and shout!!!

To Ms. Shailagh Murray:
What is the basis for your derisive dismissal of Senator Dodd's actions and concerns? I'm confused. And why such an obvious and indefensible lack of balance? The only explanation I can come up with is that you are vying for a new position at the Weekly Standard. If so, go, and go quickly with your current readers' blessings.

To Madame Clueless:

re: Senator Breathless

Two questions:

1. What parts of Senator Dodd's comments did you not understand?

2. How did you get this job?

Hmmm...

Someone standing up for the rule of law and the Constitution is subject to scorn by a major media outlet.

Color me surspised.....

I regret the tone of my previous comment. Let me just say, simply, that anyone looking for more information about why it's important to have government and corporations obey the laws should look at the reviews of Senator Dodd's new book, "Letters from Nuremberg: My father's narrative of a quest for justice."

Whatever motivated Dodd, and I don't doubt his commitment to the Constitution, the hold was the best news I heard all day.
The liberal media is SO much a myth.

The only thing worthy of derision is that it's considered unusual for a Senator to defend the Constitution of the United States.

I didn't even know Dodd's name before today, and now I've sent him a campaign contribution. If I have to vote for the constitution with my pocket book, then so be it.

It might be easier for Dodd to "avoid[] the furious glares of colleagues who don't share the same concerns" (such as the rule of law and the Constitution) when Dodd remembers the thousands of people who've sent him mail and who have made contributions to his campaign in gratitude for his courage.

Shailagh's just tired of her old nickname in the blogosphere -- The Devil. Looks like she's won herself a new one: Breathless Murray.

Sorry, I'm not understanding the reason for the mocking tone of this article toward Senator Dodd. There have been several recent "secret" holds by Republicans in the Senate for various pieces of legislation--has Ms. Murray subjected those cowardly maneuvers to the same level of scorn? Perhaps Mr. Dodd simply feels strongly about his role in upholding the Constitution and the rule of law. I suppose that's an archaic and silly notion in this political climate.

Why the derision? This is the U.S. Constitution we're talking about. Can we show some respect for that document? And maybe even some respect for a Senator defending it?

Sen. Dodd has, in the vernacular, 'huevos', unlike most of the rest of the field or any of assorted sniveling reporters covering the primary run up -- leaving integrity or shame aside for now. He's probably too good for the job, given the current level required to hold it.

Ms. Murray, your scorn for the Senator is easy to see. You don't get it, do you? You think these people who talk about "constitutional rights" and "rule of law" are simpletons, and Dodd is desperately pandering to these fools in the vain hope that somehow it will get him some traction on the road to the White House.

You may not believe it, Sheilagh, but
a) there are other reasons to do things besides the search for fame and fortune and power
b) the Consitution is worth defending

I can rely on you, Ms. Murray, to misunderstand.

I think we're looking at tomorrow's winner of the coveted Atrios w@nker of the day award!

I'm glad I was here for this historic moment.

[sniff]

Yeah, of all the Democrat Party candidates running for President, and all the Senators, Dodd is the only one standing up for the Constitution.

Newsworthy? Not for the very serious Washington Post.

Let's call a blogger ethics panel!

Dodd's announcement was, I dunno, five or six hours ago . . . and Google News says the breathless little piece above is the only attention the mainstream media has paid to this matter.

Of course, it's buried in a blog. Meanwhile, the front page of washingtonpost.com is all fascinated with "Hastert to Resign Soon" and "Torre out as Yankees Manager."

Maybe there's a Fourth Amendment conference somewhere that all the responsible newspaper editors are attending today.

Breathless? What an irresponsible and downright shameless comment on an issue which is of utmost importance to many of your readers of ALL POLITICAL AND IDEOLOGICAL PERSUASIONS.

"Breathless?" Please, responsibility in reporting. Many people are, for an excellent reason, very very concerned about this most recent fiasco of legislation the Democratic Congress is considering.

So, at least you beat the NYT blog on something that's been burning up the netroots all day (see Glenn Greenwald). Anyway, how about getting a jump tomorrow and asking Dodd's campaign how many new contributions he got Thursday.

Gee Ms. Murray, it seems you have a negative opinion regarding Senator Dodd's decision. Where's your objectivity? I did not read any where in your article the position that the proposed FISA law would effectively trash the 4th amendment of the Constitution. I hope you will take some time to read the 4th amendment and the next time you write an article you will consider writing about the need to balance our security needs of our country with the need to protect our civil liberties. Without civil liberties and without our Constitution our country has no meaning.

The fact that you obviously think it was a pointless move just goes to show how out of touch you are with the mood of the country. People want someone to stand up and do what's right, not what's politically expedient. Dodd did that today.

Does this hurt the Senator who is way behind in the poles or does it give him leadership credibility and FREE MEDIA to give his campaign a shot in the arm it has been lacking.