From: "Mark" 

I understand Beamish's skepticism, and agree with it to the level he takes
it. But, the bigger point is the ongoing, relentless pressure the elected
are feeling as a result of the increased scrutiny, so the outcome of this
particular skirmish is minor in comparison to their growing fear of us, the
people they're supposed to represent. 

I'd not be surprised, Randy, if it was Ted "bridge to nowhere"
Stevens in this case, but I don't think it matters in the overall wave of
disdain about our elected officials in general -- it appears that Frist
will bring the bill in question to the floor regardless of any so called
hold. 


"Randy"  wrote in message news:44f4fddc{at}w3.nls.net...
> John Beamish wrote:
>> http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/001428.php
>>
>> OK, ignore the somewhat distraught, frazzled commentary and focus on the
>> parallel processes.  On the one hand, it (and, being from the GWN, I was
>> definitely not aware of this) seems there is a way to block bills by use
>> of a "secret hold".  If the hold is made, the bill is
blocked and nobody
>> gets blamed because the 'culprit' (for lack of a better word!) can't be
>> identified.
>>
>> In parallel, two groups (one left, one right) are polling senators to
>> find  out who placed the secret hold by asking each to go on record as
>> saying  he/she did/didn't place the hold.
>>
>> I'm not sure which I find most fascinating:  "secret holds" or the
>> naievte  of those doing the calls to get the yea/nay answer and then
>> believing what  they are told.
>
> Mr. "The Internet is a bunch of tubes" Stevens appears to be
the culprit.

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5