October 20, 2007

Chris Dodd for President?

He doesn't really have much of a chance--at least right now. He seems like a decent enough guy, but President? I don't know. But then he shows himself apart from just about everyone by standing up against this telecom immunity bill. He has threatened to put a hold on the bill, but Reid (supposedly on our side) has threatened to go around the hold. Why do the telecoms need immunity? Here is how the President explained it:
"Now, the law needs to be changed, enhanced, by providing the phone companies that allegedly helped us with liability protection. So we found common ground there." (emphasis mine)
What the hell did he mean by "allegedly?" If they didn't help the intelligence community, they sure as hell don't need immunity. And if they did nothing wrong, there is no "allegation" to be "alleged."

Maybe we need to give Chris Dodd another look. I heard elsewhere that he raised nearly $150,000 in small donations since taking this stand which suggests what we have suspected--standing up to the Prez is better than not.

No comments: