Quote Originally Posted by PanzerJaeger View Post
They were going to end the war in 2006 too...
And then they realized that most of them were complicit in putting the troops there in the first place, and to pull funding from the military would be an actual stab-in-the-back that would be used against them for years.

This is just too good:
Quote Originally Posted by WaPo
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) gave a lengthy floor speech that included a litany of reasons to oppose the legislation. She said the telecommunication companies "come out of this with a taint" for their actions and should not receive immunity.

But, Pelosi argued, the bill also firmly rejects President Bush's argument that a war-time chief executive has the "inherent authority" on some surveillance activity necessary to fight terrorists. It restores the legal notion that the FISA law is the exclusive rule on surveillance.

"There is no inherent authority of the president to do whatever he wants. This is a democracy," Pelosi said, announcing her support for the bill.
Which is countered by the fact that Bush has already ignored the "exclusive rule" clause on the previous FISA, saying it's an unconstitutional limit on his duty.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/blogs/con...exclusive.aspx

What really scares me is that Pelosi is currently third in line. Someone so clueless and naive should not be that close to the White House (even if it's not really that "close").