"Senate Delays Vote on Piracy Bill as House Balks, Too."

Okay. But why doesn't that NYT news story have the word "Dodd" in it? This story the NYT put up last night had "Dodd" in it. Have you noticed the role of the former Senator in the SOPA fight? He's kind of a lobbyist (for the movie industry), except that he can't actually be a lobbyist, because it's illegal for a former Senator to lobby Congress in his first 2 years out of office.

Hired as the consummate Washington insider to carry the film industry’s banner on crucial issues like piracy, Mr. Dodd ended up being more coach than player.

He's more of a coach, less of a player, because it's illegal to be a player — if in this ridiculous sports metaphor, a "player" is a lobbyist — so he's less of a player.

He helped devise a strategy that called for his coalition to line up a strong array of legislative sponsors and supporters behind two similar laws — the Stop Online Piracy Act in the House, and the Protect I.P. Act in the Senate — and then to move them through the Congress quickly before possible opposition from tech companies could coalesce.

Oh, my! Isn't that elegantly phrased! It's nice to be nice to Mr. Dodd — who plotted behind the scenes to ram this thing through Congress before it was noticed by "tech companies" — i.e., all the ordinary people who like to use the internet.

But slow pacing gave the Internet and free speech advocates time to wake up and mobilize, turning what might have been a relatively simple exercise for Mr. Dodd and his allies into a bitter struggle.

His plot failed, but it should have been easy for the consummate insider, don't-call-him-a-lobbyist, Mr. Dodd.

The delays violated a cardinal rule among professional lobbyists, who generally believe the worst enemy of a proposed law is the legislative clock.

Oh, those damned delays, foiling the plots of consummate insiders, violating the rules of professional lobbyists, of which Mr. Dodd is not one, because that would be illegal.