Blogged by Brad Friedman from Phoenix, AZ…
In a conference call with several bloggers concluded moments ago, Senator Russ Feingold (D-WI) had a number of harsh words concerning today’s procedural bickering and fillibustering by Republicans in the Senate, which stifled both votes on his own legislation to end the Iraq War as well as amendments offered by other lawmakers to several non-binding resolutions that also failed to come to the floor for a full vote.
Feingold’s remarks were highly critical not just of the Republicans, but even moreso of his own Democratic caucus colleagues, “Washington insider consultants,” and even former Senatorial colleague-turned-presidential candidate John Edwards, for failing to take a tough stand to end the war in Iraq.
In a passionate, thirty-minute call, Feingold stressed, “This is an important moment to see if we’re gonna try and end this war. Frankly, I’m disappointed that Democrats are playing it safe on this one.”
“We need to play hardball on this. We’re gonna have to take the lead on this issue and we’re gonna need to tie this place up as long as it takes,” he said in describing what he sees as a fear and timidity in his colleagues who now hold a slight majority in the Senate…
“The problem is a whole lot of middle-of-the-road Democrats who refuse to pull the trigger, who refuse to do what needs to be done,” Feingold stressed. “Even people who voted against the war” seem afraid, he explained. “It requires courage. It requires brinksmanship.”
As we previously reported last Spring, after a bloggers’ lunch with Feingold in Los Angeles, the progressive third-term Senator continues to place a great deal of blame for the failure to act among his colleagues on the “Washington insiders, particularly from the previous administration…who say if you’re going to take a tough stand, they’re going to tear you apart.”
He said the advice of the “media consultants” and “power structure in Washington” has led fellow Democrats to believe they’ll be criticized if they withhold funding for a war they previously supported. Those same insiders, he explained, previously supported the war and are now scared to death about what would happen if their clients — many of whom who have now admitted their initial support for the war was a mistake — now took a tough stand to undo that mistake.
“They want their cake and to eat it too since they voted for the war. They’re trying to have it both ways. That has to end because Americans are dying unnecessarily. Too many of my colleagues are trying to massage this and have it both ways. That has to end.”
Feingold was also critical of John Edwards who, he says, has been “masquerading” as a critic of the war, but whose proposal so far only calls for refusing to fund the proposed Bush troop escalation in Iraq. Even he, Feingold said, fails in his rhetoric to call for withdrawal and a full defunding of the current debacle.
In response to our query about whether or not the Democrats might “call for a straight up or down vote” on some of these matters, as had been demanded by Republicans during similarly contentious matters while they owned the majority, Feingold said that’s a possibility that he hopes Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) would consider.
Expressing a mix of both praise and criticism for the Majority Leader’s handling of the matter, Feingold acknowledged “some problems with the way [Reid] has handled this,” but says “he’s a tough guy” and he’s been “impressed” by him. He hoped that after today’s session Reid might “go home and think over what they did to us today” and consider doing something like that.
In response to a question from Firedoglake’s Christy Hardin Smith, asking how bloggers and citizens might help in his fight, Feingold urged folks to call their Congress Members to demand tough action in hopes that it might give them the backbone to do the right thing.
“Call your members and demand a timeline to withdraw the troops and withhold funding after that,” he urged.
“I can’t go home knowing that there are Wisconsin men and women who are going to die unnecessarily because we refused to do the right thing,” the Senator concluded near the end of the early-evening call.
UPDATE: Other bloggers’ coverage of same conference call…
- Howie Klein (who also has Feingold’s full opening statement from the call)
- David Sirota
- Christy Hardin Smith (who also has contact info for your Congress Members)
- Ian Welsch
- Bob Geiger
I would like the names of the Dems who are “playing it safe”…and any Repugs we might be able to sway. I call various reps around the country at least three times a week (800 828-0498)…But often feel I could do a better job if specific people need to be targeted.
Names please?…Anyone?
Senator Feingold if you should read this please make it easier to help you by providing a list of names that would enable us to use our limited time more wisely.
To the Dems in office:
The repugs got voted out of office for a reason — wishy washy weakness. They folded to party interests, corporate interests, the war agenda, group-think, and greed.
Grow a spine or get booted out the same way as your predecessors.
Lamar Alexander (R-TN)
Saxby Chambliss (R-GA)
Thad Cochran (R-MS)
Susan Collins (R-ME)
Norm Coleman (R-MN)
John Cornyn (R-TX)
Larry Craig (R-ID)
Elizabeth Dole (R-NC)
Pete Domenici (R-NM)
Mike Enzi (R-WY)
Lindsey Graham (R-SC)
Chuck Hagel (R-NE)
Jim Inhofe (R-OK)
Mitch McConnell (R-KY)
Pat Roberts (R-KS)
Jeff Sessions (R-AL)
Gordon Smith (R-OR)
Ted Stevens (R-AK)
John Sununu (R-NH)
John Warner (R-VA)
All up for election in 2008
But then there’s the clown Lie-berman, voting sooo happily with the republicans. Just forced himself into office, of course.
I dearly love Feingold and Jim Webb. We can speak their names with pride.
I would like a list of the spineless dems.
I know Mikulski has a spine, sort of. Well she is mad at Bush too.
CORRECTION: (I later read my previous info was a bit off):
Norm Coleman (R) and Susan Collins (R) voted “Yes”
and Mary Landrieu (D) did not vote.
I verified this was verified at:
http://www.senate.gov/legislati...038;vote=00044
And please note that Bush is attempting to cut Medicare and Medicaid to help pay for his illegal war. He wants to put some of the burden on the backs of elderly and poor, while the fat cats sacrifice nothing. This should be well emphasized so that the applicable voters (like the large number of Medicare-recipient voters) are well aware of it.
Feingold for majority leader!
He’s absolutely right on the money. This is not the time for bipartisanship or strategizing. The time has come to give the Republicans hell.
I want to see one of those brush-ups right on the floor of the senate until these bullies back down. They started it and they’ve been asking for it. I guarantee you, the American people and the world would love it.
Our anger is REAL. We have the moral high ground. We can’t lose!
I’d like to see Feingold in the boxing ring with Reid.
Reid used to box professionally but I’ll bet Russ could kick his wimpy ass all over the mall!
YEeeaaah!
If Russ Feingold jumped off a bridge, I’d jump off two.
Fiengold is full of shit. It was the republicans who said they would get out of the rubber stamp habit and allow a debate on the anti-Iraq war resolution.
Do you just believe anything anyone says?
The vote was 49-47 and two republicans kept their word and voted for the debate.
Lieberman is not a democrat, he is a DINO in some things, but he is a neoCon when it comes to war. He favors the war in all its gory “glory”.
List the democrats and republicans who voted not to have the debate.
Then complain about the party who has the most members that do not even want to debate it.
What hogwash Fiengold is putting out!
The ‘fake’ opposition is angry about the ‘surge’ a.k.a. ‘The 10% solution’. Currently, approximately 200,000 soldiers fight for ‘democracy’ in Iraq [roughly US troops + foriegn troops + paid mercenaries (i.e. Blackwater)]. So, the President’s solution is to add 10% more (20,000 troops). Even assuming these extra troops perform 100% efficient, things will merely get 10% better in Iraq. Will 10% be worth the continuing carnage of American soldiers? Don’t look to the Democrats for help. They will sit idly by as they did when the gov’t suspended habeas corpus, opened mail, banned the novel “America Deceived” from Amazon, stole private lands, conducted illegal wire-taps and continues wars in the Middle East based on a false-flag event known as 9/11. If the Democrats (including Feingold) cannot stop the current 10% increase in this war, then they will never stop 100% of this war.
Only remaining link (until the gov’t pulls the novel off Google Books):
America Deceived (book)
Feingold is one of the few who have a pair in DC… I can’t believe so many people were not willing to go along with this resolution, especially since it is a symbolic, non-binding one… come on, folks, the blood of Americans is on your hands…
Feingold is from lofty Wisconsin, way up north, and evidently he sees himself as being free from the problems of the rest of us as a result of being that high up? No, Winconsin has a legal legacy where they have even persecuted scientists based on the race of the scientist:
(The Forgotten Genius).
If they will screw up hard science over racism, they will screw up political science too. And this is what is being done by falsely framing the fillibuster on the Iraq debate as a sigh of democratic weakness. CLUE: the dems did not filibuster, the republicans did.
Let him tell us about the senate fillibuster the republicans used to prevent a debate, the same fillibuster the republicans threatened to do away with in the 109th congress if the minority dems then used it.
Let him also sprinkle in a little discussion about hypocrisy as well … only this time try doing it with the facts in hand.
Lindy #3
Of your list of senate republicans who are up for re-election in ’08, the senator from Maine, Susan Collins, and the senator from Minnesota, Norm Coleman, are the only two republicans to vote “Yea”, meaning stop the filibuster and lets debate, for the first time, the Iraq war escalation.
All the democrats who voted voted “Yea”. So the democrats were unified in their vote.
Republican senator John McCain was afraid to vote, because he is watching the polls and the polls are against his neoCon position on the escalation.
Here is the vote tally. A “Yea” means stop the republican filibuster and debate the resolution, but a “Nay” means lets not debate the escalation:
One democrat did not vote because he is in the hospital. Note that republican senator Warner voted not to allow a debate and vote on his own resolution which said the president’s policy is wrong. 🙂
I’m with ya Dredd! Here’s my version of the same.
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD””SENATE S1566 February 5, 2007
Iraq Study Group said. That is what all
people say, with rare exception. Those
are the people holding hands with the
President.
We must heed the results of the November
elections and the wishes of the
American people. We must change
course, and this change starts with this
next vote.
This side””Democrats””have offered
the minority everything they have
asked for. Remember: Vote on Warner,
vote on McCain; you want a simple majority;
you want a supermajority; we
will go along with that. We have been
fair to them. Now the Senate must be
fair to our troops, their families, and
the American people. We must proceed
with a debate about Iraq and send a
clear message to President Bush that
escalation is not the answer.
Some say let the leaders work it out.
Part of this stall has been a stall for
obvious reasons. If not tonight, tomorrow?
I must file a motion to invoke
cloture on the continuing resolution
because the Republicans said they are
going to filibuster it. I have gotten letters
to that effect. We should have been
debating the Warner, McCain resolutions
today, but they have not allowed
us. They wouldn’t allow us to proceed
on this matter.
I am telling everyone within the
sound of my voice, a decision will have
to be made whether to go further than
tonight, but the time is very tenuous””
very tenuous. If they stop us from
going forward on this debate, this does
not end the debate on Iraq. It may end
the debate for a few days or a few
weeks, but, remember, we have the 9/11
Commission recommendations coming
and that is open to amendment and I
can guarantee everybody there will be
Iraq amendments involved in that debate.
The supplemental bill is coming.
This is to fund the war in Iraq basically
more than $100 billion. I think
there will probably very likely be a
number of amendments dealing with
Iraq.
They can run, but they can’t hide. We
are going to debate Iraq, and they may
have gotten all their folks to vote
against the motion to proceed, they
may stop us temporarily from debating
the escalation, but they are not going
to stop us from debating Iraq.
We have lost 3,100 soldiers, sailors,
and marines. They are dead, Madam
President. We don’t know the exact
number of how many have been wounded””
24,000, 25,000.
We are not going to allow the situation
in Iraq to continue. It is wrong.
There can be no military solution. The
President has been told that. I think it
speaks volumes when he meets with
the Iraqi Prime Minister who is elected,
and the Iraqi Prime Minister says:
Mr. President of the United States, get
all American soldiers out of Baghdad.
That’s what he said. I think it speaks
volumes when military commanders
say that it is not the way to go. We
know what Casey said. His tune has
changed a little bit since he was relieved
of duty over there.
The families of the 3,100 soldiers who
have been killed, the families of the
24,000, 25,000 who have been wounded
demand we go forward with this debate.
We are going to start voting momentarily,
and remember what the vote is.
The vote is whether we can proceed to
debate the escalation of the war in
Iraq. And the Republicans have told everybody
they are all going to vote no.
If they think this can pop up real easily
again, I think they may have another
thing coming.
I repeat, the Republicans left town
and left the Government without adequate
resources to go ahead and complete
funding of the Federal Government
for this year. We have to take up
the work they did not complete. They
funded the Government until February
15, and now it is up to us to make sure
the Government continues to run.
If they want to pull a Newt Gingrich
and close down the Government, that
is their responsibility. But I believe we
should move forward and make sure
the Government is funded, and there is
not a lot of time for Iraq. That is a sad
commentary on the situation because
we lost days as a result of these parliamentary
delays.
I ask unanimous consent that if we
get to third reading of S. 470 it then be
turned into a concurrent resolution
and passage occur on the concurrent
resolution and not S. 470. Before hearing
how anybody feels about this, I said
last week that we would be happy to
consider this bill as a resolution. Everybody
heard me say that. The American
people heard me say that. So anybody
who tries to hide under a procedural
vote because this is a bill and not
a resolution is not being fair because
simply I have stated””and I know that
everyone in this Chamber heard me say
this, and I have said it many times””I
ask unanimous consent that if we get
to third reading of S. 470, that it be
turned into a concurrent resolution
and that passage occur on the concurrent
resolution and not S. 470.
I add another unanimous consent request
to this. I am willing to change it
to a concurrent resolution right now,
as I was willing to do last week.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there
objection?
Mr. MCCONNELL. Reserving the
right to object, this is essentially the
same unanimous consent request propounded
last Thursday night. This
matter ought to be dealt with as a concurrent
resolution. It is clear the other
side does not want to vote on the Gregg
amendment. Therefore, I object.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection
is heard.
CLOTURE MOTION
Under the previous order, pursuant to
rule XXII, the Chair lays before the
Senate the pending cloture motion,
which the clerk will report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
CLOTURE MOTION
We, the undersigned Senators, in accordance
with the provisions of rule 22 of the
Standing Rules of the Senate, do hereby
move to bring to a close the debate on the
motion to proceed to Calendar No. 19, S. 470,
Bipartisan Iraq legislation.
Carl Levin, Joe Biden, Ken Salazar,
Harry Reid, Pat Leahy, Sherrod Brown,
Patty Murray, Robert Menendez, John
F. Kerry, Barbara Mikulski, Dick Durbin,
Jack Reed, Tom Harkin, Dianne
Feinstein, Bill Nelson, H.R. Clinton,
Herb Kohl, Ben Nelson.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. By unanimous
consent, the mandatory quorum
call has been waived.
The question is, Is it the sense of the
Senate that debate on the motion to
proceed to S. 470, a bill to express the
sense of the Congress on Iraq, shall be
brought to a close?
The yeas and nays are mandatory
under the rule.
The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the
Senator from South Dakota (Mr. JOHNSON)
and the Senator from Louisiana
(Ms. LANDRIEU), are necessarily absent.
Mr. LOTT. The following Senators
were necessarily absent: the Senator
from Florida (Mr. MARTINEZ) and the
Senator from Arizona (Mr. MCCAIN).
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr.
SANDERS). Are there any other Senators
in the Chamber desiring to vote?
The yeas and nays resulted””yeas 49,
nays 47, as follows:
[Rollcall Vote No. 44 Leg.]
YEAS””49
Akaka
Baucus
Bayh
Biden
Bingaman
Boxer
Brown
Byrd
Cantwell
Cardin
Carper
Casey
Clinton
Coleman
Collins
Conrad
Dodd
Dorgan
Durbin
Feingold
Feinstein
Harkin
Inouye
Kennedy
Kerry
Klobuchar
Kohl
Lautenberg
Leahy
Levin
Lincoln
McCaskill
Menendez
Mikulski
Murray
Nelson (FL)
Nelson (NE)
Obama
Pryor
Reed
Rockefeller
Salazar
Sanders
Schumer
Stabenow
Tester
Webb
Whitehouse
Wyden
NAYS””47
Alexander
Allard
Bennett
Bond
Brownback
Bunning
Burr
Chambliss
Coburn
Cochran
Corker
Cornyn
Craig
Crapo
DeMint
Dole
Domenici
Ensign
Enzi
Graham
Grassley
Gregg
Hagel
Hatch
Hutchison
Inhofe
Isakson
Kyl
Lieberman
Lott
Lugar
McConnell
Murkowski
Reid
Roberts
Sessions
Shelby
Smith
Snowe
Specter
Stevens
Sununu
Thomas
Thune
Vitter
Voinovich
Warner
NOT VOTING””4
Johnson
Landrieu
Martinez
McCain
The PRESIDING OFFICER. On this
vote, the yeas are 49, the nays are 47.
Three-fifths of the Senators duly chosen
and sworn not having voted in the
affirmative, the motion is rejected.
The majority leader is recognized.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I enter a
motion to reconsider that vote.
VerDate Aug 31 2005 01:09 Feb 06, 2007 Jkt 059060 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\G05FE6.036 S05FEPT1 jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with SENATE
Then everybody ought to read Alexander Cockburn’s article in The Nation “Who Can Stop The War.” Let’s get it right folks!
Hey Dredd
seems like your into science too. Check out this article:
Before The Big Bang
I don’t want to get in trouble for reposting the above so here’s that link:
It’s in black and white, read for yourself!
Ancient #17
I adjusted what I saw as a typo. Reid, the democratic leader, voted “Yea” instead of “Nay”.
Here is an article that catches the true nature of the lead up to the vote and the vote itself:
(The Shameful Senate).
With the exception of only a few, our two parties are duplicitous in a false left-right paradigm. The level of bi-partisan hand-holding beyond public scrutiny should be relegated to the center-ring and viewed as professional wrestling. The good clown – bad clown Punch and Judy show that these demonic marionettes preform daily would be threatre of the absurd if so many innocent weren’t dying.
Woody Allen stated in a film, “That he was once Hebrew but, has since converted to narcissism”. I think that pretty well says it all about our power structure and who is in control.
If we don’t stop these neo-pagans and insane Zionists soon, nuclear war is our future.
Ancient #19
Science. An abstract concept, yet quite useful. I say abstract to emphasize, as your link does, that what is practiced is not always what is preached. Think of the millions of science textbooks that are at first worshipped then thrown into the trash and hated when a new fact enters the picture. (that may be why textbook companies like to invest in research) 🙂 A sort of scholarly planned obsolescence.
A current story shows that science, which is what astronauts are expert at, does not change a person such that the person is immune from emotions and other essences which militate against science:
(Sexy Science and Astronauts).
Feingold is showing us that political science likewise does not offer immunity from the plagues upon the human mind, such as inflamatory rhetoric posing as fair factual comment.
I mean it does not take political rocket science (or even an electronic voting machine) to count a hundred votes.
Speaking of political science, and Feingold’s mastery of it or the lack thereof, note that the science of psychology may experience the benefits that Ted Haggard brought to political science (stumping for republicans) as Pastor Ted.
He is now saying that he has been cleansed and is heterosexual and that his years long homosexual behavior while a pastor preaching fire and brimstone against homosexuals … has faded away.
He is studying psychology with this wife in an online college somewhere.
Hell, why doesn’t he just run for senator as soon as he becomes an ePsychologist … those he helped get erected into the republican ranks would filibuster along with him.
They could vote “Yahoo” instead of “Yea” or “Ney”, and it would be a big bang of sorts.
Dredd
Thanks for correcting the Reid vote, didn’t catch that. And your comment about text book companies is true enough when you know that those companies are basically Repub owned. Reminds me of the phrase, its not about what actually happened but who gets to write what happened.
Your astonaut comparison is also quite to the point. (I was just reading a similar article.) I’m just hoping Feingold was trying to steele Dems resolve to keep pushing in this situation. But, that’s why I’d have Gore as Prez and Feingold as Vice.
What’s MISSING in this entire discourse is the REAL REASON our Congressionals can’t or WON’T actually DO anything to strongarm Bush into bringing the troops home:
CHECKOUT http://www.wrmea.com/archives/j...3/0306036.html
and weep!
You will find out that everyone of our “Heroes” and Biggies -from BOTH parties, has taken Bribe Money from AIPAC (I know, but that’s what it amounts to!)
Note especially the amounts the ones on the Defense Committee get, like McConnell, Biden, Warner, Collins, Hillery, Durbin and especially Carl Levin!
Then ask yourself why none of them has the backbone to stand against Bush’s war, let alone one that Israel wants for its own advantage!
GREAT STUFF DREDD, KEEP ON GOING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Well, if that ain’t the definitive list! Thanks GrannyB!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Did anyone notice that McCain did not vote.Why not?
Any senator can be critical of his colleagues during a conference call to a blogger. That’s no distinction. What is needed is for a senator to be critical of these people to their face, publicly, and officially.
Ok – what happened to Hagel, Smith, Graham, Warner who have all come out against the escalation? Seems like all talk and no walk to me. The majority of Americans are for a discussion and these wimps crawl into a hole.
I can understand Landriu she is trying to pry the promised money out of the hands for war to help her state but why the others?
How can one party hate another so much they will consign more of our soldiers to death? How many have to die for this administration?
Someone PLEASE tell me is campaign finance even on the horizon at this point?
The apocalypse is on the horizon, big as heck.
These fucks are keeping us busy while the administration starts World War Three.
….reform that is!
Very true 99, but that’s why I think Feingold is moving in the right direction, especially in light of what GrannyB posted.
Fellow bloggers here know I would vote for Feingold for president or vice president, even tho he talks shit sometimes.
Ancient, you were technically correct about Reid’s vote, however, I was advancing the spirit of the thing. He had to cast a “Nay” vote to keep a reconsideration motion open. If the heat gets up like I think it will, there will be another vote on Warner’s resolution.
The bottom line here is that the dems are together in unity for the correct position … YES debate the Iraq war escalation … and the repubs are unified, except for two senators, for the wrong reason.
I have tried to illuminate the way the senate and house work … and I have done it here on this blog for several years.
It takes 60 votes for anything to happen in the Senate, and since congress is bicameral, for any legislation to get passed that is in filibuster danger.
And add to that the presidential veto and we see that unless there are 67 votes the republicans can stop anything. It takes two-thirds to override a veto.
If we, Feingold included, stop beating on the democrats, the public will start to get the message: THE PEOPLE MUST VOTE 10 more democrats into the Senate in ’08. Or 10 repubs out and 10 indys in, or greens, etc., I don’t care. They will be more reasonable and less knee-jerk robotons than republicans. Anything but republican trance fools.
When that happens and they can’t get 60 votes THEN I will join the feelings of Feingold.
As it stands now his position is deceitful and will mislead those who are not up on civics 101 and the way congress works.
The US REPUBLIDEM PARTY – self serving to the corporate 1% running this country/world.
Wake up American soldiers in IRAQ because your gonna continue to die for their illegal war based on BUSHIT LIES because these greedy mismanagers are 1 party with 1 cause!
On 9/11, Arabs in a cave collapsed World Trade Building #7 in 5.6 seconds 10 hours after the twin towers fell without even having to crash a jet airliner into the steel concrete structure. That’s some amazing shit but could they do it to the new taller rebuilt #7 in the same time???
Keep the war machine going Senators!
Haliburton has no problem with that.
Siege Heil to US Imperialistic FASCISM!!!
Dredd:
I didn’t see Feingold saying the Democrats voted against the debate. What he is saying is that they need to draw the line for the Republicans and quit putting up with their crap. Just voting isn’t enough. The Democrats have to start playing rough and making threats about “nuclear options” . The Republicans are acting like they’re still in charge!
After all, Feingold DID prove the Democrats were AWOL on voting to give George a simple censure when he should be hung for treason! On the other hand, Feingold hasn’t been saying much about the voting machines. Every Democrat should have been SCREAMING FROM THE ROOFTOPS about that one. Even former congress members.
Hey Folks
When I called Senator Specter’s office to voice my opinion his aid said, “the Senator hasn’t made up his mind yet, but the reason he voted ney yesterday was because the democrats wouldn’t hear/vote on (not sure which he said) any of the republican’s resolutions.” I then proceeded to tell him that this wasn’t any time to be pussyfooting around. What part of the fact you work for us and it is clear Americans want out of this war now, don’t you get. I also made clear that out of all the resolution’s Senator Feingold’s is the one I support.
I don’t know about you, but to me it seems the repubs are dancing around to make themselves look good for the next election and not taking into account we have the most treacherous, deceitful administration in history that is purposefully trying to start WWIII. If there ever was a time to reach out to repub friends or family to get them to see exactly what’s going on it is NOW! And whatever it is you have to do to get them to call their Congress people directly for the love of God and Country do it!
Larry #38 and Ancient #39
Larry said:
Actually Larry, Feingold introduced his resolution in the 109th congress in the judiciary committee which Specter chaired. It didn’t even get out of committee to the floor in the republican controlled 109th congress.
Already the dems are getting this out to the floor in the 110th democratic controlled congress. The problem at issue is that the republicans are filibustering it and no vote on the resolution can happen until cloture.
Feingold’s 109th congress resolution was not substantially different from Warner’s 110th (only republican resolutions – one Warner and the other McCain are now being considered) by the way Ancient. Both are non-binding rebukes of the president’s policies.
The elephant in the room in this senate filibuster debate, folks, is that if a non-binding resolution can’t get thru, any binding resolution doesn’t have a snowball’s chance in hell of getting thru.
I was glad to see that the House is starting up a similar resolution.
The House cannot be filibustered, and there most certainly will be a vote on it (link here).
One good thing about this is that this whole exercise is an opportunity to learn civics 101 and constitutional law 101. A good place to start a better understanding of US government.
Thank you Dredd for exposing the REAL story! To bad we don’t get that kind of straight talk from MSM. All they seem to want to do is put a label on a person, then crash the person, not the idea, into the ever growing pile of shit that is our means to making informed decisions!
Dredd:
It’s true that the Senate is still a tough place for time honored procedures to allow us any real power, but what I want the Democrats to start doing is simple. We are treated like second class citizens by the “main stream media”, but that doesn’t prevent the Democrats from raising holy hell on every other venue they can find.
If they are truly on the side of the people, there are plenty of places on the internet that are not owned by the corporations where they can jump in the deep end and risk their jobs to get the word out. If enough of them fall, the people will stand up. Howard Dean proved that we care and will stand up for the ones who support US instead of the established old boys club.
If I’m wrong, and we all go down, at least we tried. We can no longer be represented by leaders who talk tough and fold when they get a call from Exxon.
This house resolution sounds good though, maybe things will come out to our advantage on that. You are much more knowledgeable them I am about the way things work in Washington, but I’m still livid about Roberts and Alito.
The republicans who are facing election next year (see Lindy’s post #3) are beginning to feel the heat.
They are telling McConnell, their leader, that they are going to protest the Iraq debacle in upcoming bills (link here).
The dems have already told McConnell he can run but he can’t hide.
The dems have full committee control and the republicans can be completely shut down in committee and they know it.
The temper tantrums and the bushlike stubbornness McConnell is ordering the republicans to exhibit will cost them very dearly in the ’08 election, and in committee proceedings.
We have them exactly where we want them.
I like your last comment there in #43. Hope you’re right. I’ll try to calm down for today.
Another place where we have them exactly where we want them is in the Intelligence Committee.
That is where the 109th republican congress committee chairman, Pat Roberts, lied to the dems to get them to accept Phase I of the inquiry into the use of intelligence leading up to the Iraq invasion.
Roberts promised a “Phase II” where they would scrutinize the president’s role to see if the intelligence was misused.
The new democratic chairman, Rockefeller, has said he will take up Phase II big time soon.
A report just released indicates:
(Raw Story, emphasis added). While the Libby trial can be said to have fried Cheney, this one will also fry Bush. I fully expect impeachable offenses to be exposed.
The evidence has been known to everyone who cared to look for years. It should be easy to get this train moving. Maybe we’re in good shape after all.
The media should be shaking in their shoes also.