Democrats & Liberals Archives

Democrats: What's Your Response to Feingold?

None of the Democratic senators came out in favor of Senator Russ Feingold’s resolution to censure Bush for breaking the law with his warrantless wiretapping of American citizens. Today, 4 Republicans introduced a bill that effectively makes Bush’s crime legal. The question I have for Democratic senators s: What are you going to do now? Are you going to vote for this bill? Or are you going to show some spine and follow Feingold’s lead - vote for censure?

As I have stated before, I was very unhappy with the response - or rather, lack of response - of the Democratic senators to Feingold's resolution. They have another chance, as this Forbes news item shows:

"Four Republican senators introduced a bill Thursday that they hope will end the furor over President Bush's surveillance program by writing it into law."

The 4 Republicans are Senators Mike DeWine, Olympia Snowe, Lindsey Graham and Chuck Hagel. They offer a very simple solution. You don't like what Bush did because he broke the law? No problem. We'll change the law. The ACLU, however, has a different take:

"The ACLU said in a statement that the bill would allow 'Americans' phone calls and e-mails to be monitored for 45 days without any court oversight and makes court review after that period optional' - in violation of the Fourth Amendment's guarantees against unreasonable searches."

In another case, the N.Y. Times editorial board wrote earlier this week about president Bush's domestic advisor Claude Allen who got caught shoplifting:

"If the current Congress had been called on to intervene in the case of Mr. Allen, it would probably have tried to legalize shoplifting."

That's the way Republicans think. Anything the president or one of his advisors do is OK. And if others disagree, they will just change the law. Do Democratic senators feel the same way?

Democratic senators, you have a choice. You can take the wimpy approach and vote for the Republican cover-up. Or you can stand on principle with Feingold and vote against this bill. As long as you are staying with principle, go all the way and endorse Feingold's censure resolution.

Don't destroy your second chance to demonstrate Democratic principles. Stand with Feingold.

Posted by Paul Siegel at March 17, 2006 5:31 PM
Comments
Comment #134208

Paul

To use our president’s term - bring it on.

Let the Dems try to explain why they don’t want the president to listen in on terrorist. Let them try to explain why when he does things that Roosevelt, Truman and even the pious Jimmy Carter did, it is evil.

Dems are not that stupid. They will not stand with Feingold. I respect his integrity, but his is a fool’s errand and the Dem leadership knows it.

Posted by: Jack at March 17, 2006 5:58 PM
Comment #134220

Paul,
Senators Harkin and Boxer have signed on with Feingold’s censure. I’ve heard that Kerry is considering signing on as well. In my opinion whoever doesn’t sign on is a complete wimp —because the American public are supporting this censure of the president. The Dem’s who won’t stand up for our Constitution, don’t deserve to get re-elected. It really is that simple.

Jack:
“Let the Dems try to explain why they don’t want the president to listen in on terrorist.”

This is the spin they’re putting on it. But it’s pure BS.
This is about the president spying on American citizens for no good reason, not terrorists.
This is about the fact that he broke the law and violated our Constitutional rights.
This is about the fact that Republicans now want to make his illegal action retro-actively legal so that they can cover up for a president and an administration who are as crooked and rotten to the core as you could possibly get.
The American people know this is true (look at all his poll numbers), and they want something done to address this outrageous situation. But unfortunately the Dems are too weak and afraid of their own shadow to stand up and do the right thing.
It makes me so sick.

Posted by: Adrienne at March 17, 2006 6:39 PM
Comment #134222

i support this censure resolution and i admire feingold for the effort, but censure is not nearly enough. any congressman who opposes this measure, i think, is simply revealing their true opportunistic nature. they value only reelection - which is exactly why we should deny it to them. censure first, impeach next!

Posted by: diogenes (i) at March 17, 2006 6:53 PM
Comment #134229

Adrienne
You’re right about the American people wanting something done about ALL the outrageous things done by this administration, but who can you turn to to get results? Feingold and a few supporters are not enough! Methinks it’s not so much a lack of spine as it is a fear of being outed as one of the many making a substantial profit at the expense of those who can’t afford their own lobbyists. I’d be interested in knowing how many of our congressional delegates have some of their wealth in “off-shore” banks. Where are the great computor “hacker” when you really need them?

Posted by: smitty at March 17, 2006 7:20 PM
Comment #134232

Please, please, PLEASE try to censure or impeach the President. Nothing will wake up the conservatives like a good dose of unfounded attacks with a purely political agenda. The Republicans came away looking like the chodes when they impeached Clinton, and old Slick Willie came off looking like the innocent victim. Bring ‘em on!

Posted by: Duano at March 17, 2006 7:25 PM
Comment #134233

Bush blatantly broke the law and it would do him some good to get slapped down. Hard to believe Dems won’t sign on for this.

Posted by: Max at March 17, 2006 7:25 PM
Comment #134238

You don’t have enough Dems to slap anybody down.

Posted by: Duano at March 17, 2006 7:40 PM
Comment #134239

I think we should push for a Congressional investigation of the illegal wiretapping. Pushing for Censure looks premature, because no one has legally proven that Bush broke the law, and it’s easy for REPs to laugh it off.

Could they so easily laugh off an investigation?

Posted by: tony at March 17, 2006 7:43 PM
Comment #134245

tony,

yes, an investigation would be nice. however, it’s not going to happen - just like this censure. it is quite clear that bush broke the law… he has admitted his actions and his actions are illegal. the point is to make it known that we do not approve, and maybe even counteract this precedent for future presidents.

…and when the incumbents are out of office perhaps then something more substantial can be done. until then, the democrats are too spineless (and few in number) to do anything, and the republicans just want this issue to go away. this censure is merely a demonstration of our discontent.

duano,

i will be very happy to hear what you have to say after the upcoming congressional elections. then, we will not only *try* to impeach bush, we will remove him from office entirely! after that, who knows? perhaps jail time for all involved? i get shivers…

Posted by: diogenes (i) at March 17, 2006 8:05 PM
Comment #134247

tony:
“I think we should push for a Congressional investigation of the illegal wiretapping. Pushing for Censure looks premature, because no one has legally proven that Bush broke the law, and it’s easy for REPs to laugh it off.”

Tony, FISA is the law. Bush broke that law while lying numerous times about upholding that law to the American people. Then he admitted that he broke the law because the NYT finally published their piece. Then he said he’d continue to break the law because he thought he could for several reasons which hold no weight whatsoever with the majority of Constitutional scholars and lawyers in this country.
I honestly don’t think we need an investigation to acknowledge all of this, because the proof that this is a high crime/misdemeanor is already before our eyes.
IMO the Dems need to stand up for the Constitution, and they need to do it NOW.

“Could they so easily laugh off an investigation?”

Hey, they’re already laughed off a pre-emptive war based on lies, so doesn’t that mean they’re willing to laugh off anything?

Posted by: Adrienne at March 17, 2006 8:15 PM
Comment #134248

I admire Finegold, but I say screw the censure. Let’s concentrate on taking back the house where we can then initiate an investigation and impeach the SOB.

Posted by: Mike Prim at March 17, 2006 8:26 PM
Comment #134249

diogenes,

First of all, you guys aren’t taking over in ‘07. But just to humor you, are you really going to win a two-thirds majority in both houses? NOT! Nice try, though.

Posted by: Duano at March 17, 2006 8:28 PM
Comment #134251

And BTW, are you sure you want a Prsident Cheney?

Posted by: Duano at March 17, 2006 8:30 PM
Comment #134253

“First of all, you guys aren’t taking over in ‘07. But just to humor you, are you really going to win a two-thirds majority in both houses? NOT! Nice try, though.”

first of all, i have absolutely no idea what you mean by “you guys”. but just to enlighten you, this administration is going down with or without impeachment. bush is a criminal and history will regard him as such. one day you will deny having voted for him. but hey, whatever helps you sleep at night buddy.
neo-cons have failed. nice try, though.

Posted by: diogenes (i) at March 17, 2006 8:36 PM
Comment #134256

Once again in our history it is up to New England to lead the way for our freedoms:-) Maybe the rest of the true blue American states will follow suit!
In any case, the trial will start on 1/20/07.
DickBush will look good in the prison jammies starting 1/20/09.
I only hope they get put in with some Crips and Bloods.

Posted by: Dave at March 17, 2006 8:47 PM
Comment #134258

Finegold is just a neo-lib running for an office he will never hold. He is one of the most partisan hacks there and can’t be taken serious. Everyone keeps saying the wire tapping is illegal but that determination has not been made. The neo-libs support the terrorists and can’t bring themselves to do what it takes to catch them. Without Life, Liberty is useless.

Posted by: nunya at March 17, 2006 8:55 PM
Comment #134259
Without Life, Liberty is useless

Without liberty, life is useless.

Posted by: JayJay Snowman at March 17, 2006 8:59 PM
Comment #134260

This is one of many (and I do mean many) reasons why I am no longer a Democrat. I finally did the right thing and joined the Socialist Party USA. I cast my first ballot in 1972, the year 18 year olds were allowed to vote, and of course, I voted for George McGovern. Every vote since then has been for “a lesser of two evils” and that is, simply, a waste of a vote. Our political system is morally corrupt. The SPUSA is very small and there are other Socialist groups/parties with more “influence”, but it is the oldest, most reliable socialist organization in the U.S.A. What good will it do to drop out as a Democrat? Well, for God’s sake, what good has it done to be one? Ray Palmitier Pampa, TX

Posted by: Ray Palmitier at March 17, 2006 9:01 PM
Comment #134261

I thought the Democrats are the Socialist PartyUSA. Or was that Communist PartyUSA?

Posted by: Duano at March 17, 2006 9:08 PM
Comment #134264

“Everyone keeps saying the wire tapping is illegal but that determination has not been made.”

yes, i hear sadam has yet to be convicted as well… so he’s obviously innocent, why bother with a trial? pure genius.

“Without Life, Liberty is useless.”

i hope bush/cheney agree with you, cuz they’re gonna get life. if you truly believe your ridiculous statement, and wish to experience ‘maximum security’, perhaps you should join them?

Posted by: diogenes (i) at March 17, 2006 9:15 PM
Comment #134265

Good. You guys just keep on thinking of ways to hate Bush. That’s what your good at.

Too bad you lost all your liberty so that you are all afraid to write how much you dislike the president. I would be interested in what you would say if you were not so afraid to criticize the government. If only Bush had not taken away your freedoms nobody would be afraid to call him a criminal

Posted by: Jack at March 17, 2006 9:16 PM
Comment #134266

If it isn’t against the law, why are they going to pass a new one?

Posted by: womanmarine at March 17, 2006 9:18 PM
Comment #134268

I don’t hate Bush. I don’t know him. I do hate his policies, though. I hate his lies and I hate that he has been a terible steward of our tax dollars. I love his mom, Barbara, she cracks me up!

If it isn’t against the law, why are they going to pass a new one?

Why bother? He didn’t follow the first law, what makes them think he will follow a new one?

Posted by: JayJay Snowman at March 17, 2006 9:29 PM
Comment #134270

slow down womanmarine,

you’re being logical and making entirely too much sense… the neobushies might not be able to follow you. but, maybe if you throw in a “hail king dubbya”, they’ll just blindly acquiesce.

Posted by: diogenes (i) at March 17, 2006 9:32 PM
Comment #134271
Without Life, Liberty is useless

If the boogyman doesn’t come and get ya in the middle of the night, then you have to worry that the government will come and throw ya in the clink! What good is that?

Posted by: JayJay Snowman at March 17, 2006 9:33 PM
Comment #134274

“Why bother? He didn’t follow the first law, what makes them think he will follow a new one?”

why, then we’ll just pass *another* law. and another, and another…

Posted by: diogenes (i) at March 17, 2006 9:39 PM
Comment #134282

Mike Prinn wrote “I admire Finegold, but I say screw the censure. Let’s concentrate on taking back the house where we can then initiate an investigation and impeach the SOB.”

I agree. So long as the Republicans control the Congress, this will go nowhere. Duano, who I am sure did not mean to, actually made a good point when he asked “And BTW, are you sure you want a Prsident Cheney?”

A Democratic Congress need not limit impeachment to Bush. Cheney would also be fair game. If both are convicted, then the new Democratic Speaker of the House would succeed to the Presidency. Let’s focus on winning control of the Congress so this will be more than tilting at windmills.

I will ask a question that I have asked before. Given the inability of the pro-Bush posters on this board (or any other they infest) to deal in anything but insults and denials of reality, why do all of you bother to interact with them?

There are plenty of positive ideas for change that centrists and liberals, and honest conservatives also, need to discuss and promote as part of a winning Democratic platform. We have no time to waste trying to argue with the pathologically clueless.

Posted by: Robert Benjamin at March 17, 2006 10:25 PM
Comment #134284

RB,

Good points all around.

Posted by: JayJay Snowman at March 17, 2006 10:36 PM
Comment #134290

Right on, R. Benjamin !!

Posted by: Sandra Davidson at March 17, 2006 11:03 PM
Comment #134292

“honest conservatives”

it is truly a sad day when we must precede and qualify the conservative label with “honest” for reasons of specificity. oh for the days when the democrats were the only irresponsible spenders and supporters of overbearing, centralized big government.

Posted by: diogenes (i) at March 17, 2006 11:07 PM
Comment #134297

To Censure Bush is like trying to extinguish a wildfire with a squirt gun. Its WORTHLESS. To go after an Impeachment would be ballsy..but, then who are you left with…Think about it.

Posted by: Jose at March 17, 2006 11:38 PM
Comment #134299

To Censure Bush is like trying to extinguish a wildfire with a squirt gun. Its WORTHLESS. To go after an Impeachment would be ballsy..but, then who are you left with…Think about it.

Posted by: Jose at March 17, 2006 11:43 PM
Comment #134300

as previously mentioned, the effort to impeach need not be exclusively reserved for bush.

Posted by: diogenes (i) at March 17, 2006 11:44 PM
Comment #134310

Most of the Democrats are spineless political hacks. Feingold is one of the few Democrats who isn’t scared to stand up for what he believes in and has the actual “balls” to challenge, even by himmself, the Republican juggarnaut within Congress, Supreme Court, and the White House. It is such a shame though that so many Americans are blinded by the Bush Administration’s lies. I mean how much more can the American people take, first it was lying about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, then the unappropiate handling of Hurricane Katrina, and now wire-tapping fellow Americans because we suspect that they MIGHT be terrorists. Is America going to be the bleak world in Orwell’s 1984 where the government is always watching and listening to us!?
“They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” Benjamin Franklin

Posted by: greenstuff at March 18, 2006 12:04 AM
Comment #134311

Feingold is very likely right on this issue. If the Dem Party had his back, they might actually be able to educate the public about what constitutional rights and executive abuse mean. The poll numbers might be swung. Even a failed censure movement could serve the U.S. public.

Alas, it would be an uphill and potentially costly political battle. The U.S. public’s appreciation for and historical understanding of what it takes to maintain a democracy has been badly eroded over the years. I’m honestly not sure American citizens can any longer maintain their civil rights, being so ready to give them up to those who have proven themseleves either untrustworthy or inept.

The decision not to support censure, which is only the most mild of rebukes for what may actually be high crimes (we still don’t know and may never know), is much like the whole debate over the Dubai. The politicians appealed to the worst instincts and fears of the U.S. public when it came to Dubai. They’re doing so again in saying “bring it on” to any movement to censure.

We have become such collective cowards that it’s almost laughable. The GOP and Dems are equally cynical about the U.S. population’s willingness to stand up for what were once its values. The sad part is that they’re right — which makes Feingold’s actions, even if politically motivated, a small puff of fresh air in a federal government smothered in cynicism.

It is yet another reminder that democracies seldom fall to outside threats. They usually die from within.

Posted by: Reed Sanders at March 18, 2006 12:10 AM
Comment #134312

Okay folks…..go check this out. I just did and made a small donation as well. Gotta start somewhere !!!
http://www.impeachbush.org/site/PageServer

Posted by: Sandra Davidson at March 18, 2006 12:11 AM
Comment #134313

ITA with Mike Prim, lets concentrate on 2006, get a democratic majority, and then find the best person for the presidency in 2008, with an agenda preventing the kind of nonsense we have seen for the last 5 years. I honestly do not care whether or not GWBush is censured or impeached. Before he is gone, everyone in this country will know what everyone else in the world already knows, that GWBush is a worthless sack of sh*t.

And Duano, dial 1800-flamingtroll, they need you to call home

Posted by: ohrealy at March 18, 2006 12:13 AM
Comment #134314

Thank you diogenes….I appreciate the highlight. I did understand about how far impeachment could extend. I just don’t believe that it’ll happen- regardless if the nature in which its lesser known rules are written to permit us to do so. Probably because we can’t even oust criminals from that administration with more well known rules and laws…for instance, Karl Rove.

Anyhow, I hope you are right and if given a chance we actually use the recourse of impeachment to its fullest extent.

Posted by: Jose at March 18, 2006 12:14 AM
Comment #134321

“I will ask a question that I have asked before. Given the inability of the pro-Bush posters on this board (or any other they infest) to deal in anything but insults and denials of reality, why do all of you bother to interact with them?

There are plenty of positive ideas for change that centrists and liberals, and honest conservatives also, need to discuss and promote as part of a winning Democratic platform. We have no time to waste trying to argue with the pathologically clueless.

Posted by: Robert Benjamin at March 17, 2006 10:25 PM”

How right you are Robert! To quote Eric Hoffer:

“You can discover what your enemy fears most by observing the means he uses to frighten you.”

KansasDem

Posted by: KansasDem at March 18, 2006 12:44 AM
Comment #134322

Go boys & girls. Who do we hate - BUSH, BUSH.

Please give money to the glorious cause. Praise Feingold.

So we have Feingold, Conyers and Boxer. One is a idealistic dreamer. The other two are just cognitively challenged buffoons. None are going anyplace with this. I hear that Moe is the leader. Larry and Curly follow along.

Posted by: Jack at March 18, 2006 1:00 AM
Comment #134324

Paul,

The real beauty of Feingold’s censure proposal is the timing. He’s not up for re-election this year. Those incumbent Democrats, and those who are challenging incumbent Repuglicans, can decide what position will play best with the voters in their own state and district.

It’ll be interesting to see how the vote plays out on this new domestic surveillance bill. I long thought of Chuck Hagel as one of the last honest Republicans and he just slipped off the list. In fact, I’m not even sure there is a list anymore.

KansasDem

Posted by: KansasDem at March 18, 2006 1:17 AM
Comment #134335

Those of you saying we should only concentrate on November 2006 seem to be putting politics before what we all know is dead wrong for our country.
I know, I know. Politics are all the Republicans currently care about and they’ve been verbally crapping all over us and winning elections with their Rovian smear campaigns. But do you really think it’s wise to allow the mindset of the Democratic Party to degenerate into that kind of underhandedness? Or reflect their stupidity and shortsightedness?
Censuring what this president has done is not some senseless attack on him or the GOP — and don’t let them tell you it is. This is about demanding that all American presidents follow the rule of law — just like the rest of us are expected to. Period.

Whether you’ve ever thought about this fact or not, let me remind you of something — you will one day look back on these years. You will be an old person reviewing your own history, and the history of others who lived, and worked, and fought, and struggled beside you. And you will one day review the presidency of George W. Bush and what you were advocating for during this time.

Are you truly willing to do nothing in the face of this disastrous, corrupt, and secretive presidency? Not speak out? Demand nothing from the leaders of your party in this historical moment?
You really must ask yourselves that question — and you must later live with the answer you gave, and with the answer you asked your leaders to give.

Retroactively making the illegality of what Bush has done (broken the law and violated our Constitutional rights) legal is a travesty both now, and will be viewed as such in the future.
Dems are always (usually dishonestly) being called weak — but this is the chance to show what liberals have always known — that strict adherence to our Constitution is what has made this country strong. Is winning the next election so important to you that you’re willing to play the parts of docile and silent “moderates” when we are currently faced with the most rash, unwise, and immoderate president this nation has ever had?
I think it is the worst idea imaginable — and something which will undoubtedly be a future embarrassment.

This man has been abridging, violating and ignoring our Constitution. Do you really think it makes the party look strong to let this pass by without a reaction from the opposition party?
In my opinion, if the Democratic leaders stand with Feingold now, they and you who vote for them will at least be able to hold your heads up and know you did the right thing — for yourselves and for all the future generations of Americans to come.

But if instead we allow Bush to get away with this illegal wire tapping of law abiding American citizens, and with the way he repeated lied to us about it, it is a crime. And if we permit the Republicans to make a mockery of the rule of law by changing it in order to make those illegal actions legal, it is an even greater crime, as well as a disgrace.
To allow that is a betrayal of our founders, of ourselves and of all future Americans — because we will have allowed this Incompetent to forever change the way that our citizens view their own Constitutional rights. Not to mention the power of the presidency, and whether or not the rule of law still actually applies to the executive branch of our government.

We need Democrats and Liberals — all the Democrats and Liberals — to get behind the censure of this president. Whether it only ends up being a symbolic gesture, or later leads to impeachment, we need for it to go on record that we virulently dissaproved of what he is doing and of how he lied to us while doing it until he got caught. And for the sake of future generations, we can show that at the very least, and without an ounce of true power under our control, that we still tried our best to stop him.

Okay, sorry for the rant. These are just my opinions which I hope you’ll give a moments consideration.

Posted by: Adrienne at March 18, 2006 3:20 AM
Comment #134338

I actually heard a Republican Congressman, on one of those “talk” shows on CNN say in response to the person interviewing him “Who cares what the people want”

I thought that being an elected official was a civil service job. When did that change?

And… I don’t know… what do Republicans think about that? That their elected official doesn’t care what they think?

Same thing is going on for Democrats as well. When will our elected officials start doing the job we put them in there to do.. which used to be represent the people.

Posted by: Kc at March 18, 2006 3:49 AM
Comment #134342

I have a major issue with this whole thread.

What will an attempt at impeaching Bush or censuring Bush accomplish now? Neither will pass now - or even be taken seriously. Also, the perception of censure by most Americans is a futile Congressional procedural waste of time and they might even perceive it as providing a sign of weakness to “the enemy.” Right now, it’s like trying to boil the ocean.

What we need to do now is focus on OUR message - to make sure that the American people understand what our party stands for and how we will make positive impacts on their daily lives. WE NEED TO FOCUS ALL OF OUR EFFORTS ON SPREADING OUR MESSAGE. Let’s let the REPs and Bush hang themselves on their own - they are quite good at that.

Let’s suck up our anger and turn into energy to move us forward - not to stay on track with the REPs. Unless we do something amazing over the next few months, the public will again “vote for the lesser of two evils” and I have no idea who might win that race. Let’s give them real messages to sink their teeth into.

(and for anyone who thinks I want to do this because I like Bush… the ONLY thing I’d like from Bush is to see him on a box with a pointed black hood and wires conected to his testicles. It’s a matter of getting to what we need to have, not what feels good - even when we KNOW we are right.)

Posted by: tony at March 18, 2006 7:49 AM
Comment #134345

“I thought the Democrats are the Socialist PartyUSA. Or was that Communist PartyUSA?”

Funny you say that when it has been this Republican President and this Republican congress that has passed the biggest entitlement program ever.

Anyone who breaks the law should be accountable. That’s all Feingold is trying to say and I agree.

Posted by: Tom L at March 18, 2006 7:59 AM
Comment #134347

“Anyone who breaks the law should be accountable. That’s all Feingold is trying to say and I agree.”

I agree wholeheartedly, but I’d rather do something that really works - like taking back the Senate and House and then having a Bush-beenie-weenie roast.

Posted by: tony at March 18, 2006 8:10 AM
Comment #134351

here’s a bit of humor to help make the point:

“Democrats Vow Not To Give Up Hopelessness”

http://www.theonion.com/content/node/45793

Posted by: tony at March 18, 2006 8:49 AM
Comment #134353

All I want to know is where is Feingold’s censure resolution on being led into a war on a false premise?

Posted by: mike sommerkamp at March 18, 2006 9:09 AM
Comment #134355

Jack:

Too bad you lost all your liberty so that you are all afraid to write how much you dislike the president

So glad you finally have awakened to the fact that Bush and his buddies have gutted our Constitution and Bill of Rights!!

Since Bush took over:

1) Took over with a $236 billion surplus and now the U.S. has a $423 billion deficit.

2) Energy costs up 50% since 2000.

3) Over 6 million people have lost their health coverage since 2000.

4) During 2004 1.1 million additional U.S. citizens descended below the poverty line.

Bush may be a whiz for corporations, but he’s a complete disaster for the ordinary U.S. citizen.

Bush’s policies simply stink…especially for the 99% who are not at the top of the “monied” list…Bush is not good for the U.S. nor the world…anyone who considers the U.S. Constitution a “goddamned piece of paper” shouldn’t even be considered as a candidate for president!

Posted by: Lynne at March 18, 2006 9:27 AM
Comment #134361

mike sommerkamp…..and to anyone else interested in checking this out….
http://feingold.senate.gov/censureresolution.pdf#search=’censure%20resolution’

Posted by: Sandra Davidson at March 18, 2006 10:27 AM
Comment #134363

Jack,

…cognitively challenged buffoons. None are going anyplace with this. I hear that Moe is the leader. Larry and Curly follow along.
Name-calling is beneath you, Jack. And don’t say “they started it” because that’s just childish and silly.

All,
I find it so ironic that the same folks who screamed “this is a nation of laws” during the Clinton impeachment are now twisting, dodging, squirming, distracting, trying to define what the word “is” means, and doing anything they can to avoid the fact that the President and a number of other Republicans have broken the law themselves. I guess the law only applies when it’s convenient.

Hypocricy, thy name is Republican.

Posted by: ElliottBay at March 18, 2006 10:31 AM
Comment #134369

Adrienne, I do not see how Feingold will be able to get anywhere until after we get a new Congress.
I do not believe enough Rpblcns could be persuaded, to ever get a vote on it. They are more likely to pass a resolution canonizing GWBush, or declaring him the King of the United States. They are already trying to legalize his actions retroactively.

Posted by: ohrealy at March 18, 2006 11:00 AM
Comment #134370

Jack,

Under the evil genius Karl Rove, the Bush Regime has became superb propagandists. They have done a good job of confusing the issue and making the American people think that it actually has anything to do with weather or not you have something to hide. This issue is not about what you have to hide or not hide. That is idiotic.

The Bush Regime has used demonstrably misleading, false, repetitious, “proto-fascist big lie” style talking points to confuse many Americans into believing that we must chose between being tough on terrorists and protecting our Constitutional Fourth Amendment rights against being spied on without a warrant… without judicial oversight… without any checks on unbridled executive authority. The FISA Court would allow everything that Bush claims that he is doing, so, why does he want to set himself above the law, and claim this excessive, and unconstitutional executive power for the Presidency? Does he want to be King?
For the sake of argument, lets ( you) assume the very best. Assume that Bush really does just want this power in order to protect us from terrorists. Assume that he will not use this excessive Unconstitutional power to spy on political rivals, and use the information to political advantage, there by undermining our Constitutional Democracy. Assume that he will not use this excessive Unconstitutional power to spy on journalists in order to get advance warning of negative news stories so that he can be prepared to lie and politically spin the situation, there by undermining our Constitutional Democracy. Assume, if you must, that Bush will not use this massive Unconstitutional executive power to spy on powerful politicians, Supreme Court Justices, Journalists, high government and military officials, and business leaders, in an effort to find embarrassing or incriminating evidence that he could use to black mail them, there by undermining our Constitutional Democracy. Go ahead… you naive and foolish Republican… make all of these foolish and dangerous assumptions… fool… “Power corrupts.” Excessive power corrupts excessively. “Absolute power corrupts absolutely.” Bush probably is abusing this power… but even assuming that he is not abusing this power… Once this awesome, massive, unbalanced, excessive, Unconstitutional power is successfully gathered into the Presidency, do you really want to trust that some future President - like maybe Hillary - will not abuse this power… you idiot Republican… Do you really want to trust Hillary with that kind of power? I am a Democrat, but it would scare the bahgeebees out of me to think of Hillary or any other Democratic President having that kind of power - with no Judicial oversight - with no Congressional oversight - with absolutely no checks and balances… Bush is probably abusing this power, but if he is not, some future President will… some Republican… some Democrat… The power will be abused. Our Constitutional Democracy is hanging by a frayed thread. Are you Republicans daft? I say again… Where were you? Why weren’t you marching in the streets with us in Washington DC on Feb. 4th?

For more visit my blog at: Ray’s Political Blog

Posted by: Ray G. at March 18, 2006 11:05 AM
Comment #134373

Tony said,

“Let’s suck up our anger and turn into energy to move us forward - not to stay on track with the REPs. Unless we do something amazing over the next few months, the public will again “vote for the lesser of two evils” and I have no idea who might win that race. Let’s give them real messages to sink their teeth into.”

My point exactly. On a state to state basis “we” need to do what we know is truly “smart” to win. Sure, part of me wants to see Bush censured, but a larger part believes that we can’t afford (literally) to get this wrong. We must stop the “bleeding” of our treasury, our troops, and our position in the international community.

Nearly all of my political contributions are going towards the election efforts of John Doll
http://www.dollforcongress.org/
here in Kansas. Everyone says he can’t beat Jerry Moran, whose US House seat has in the past been largely unchallenged. I say BS. They can’t discourage me from trying. We must stay motivated and win for the sake of America.

KansasDem


Posted by: KansasDem at March 18, 2006 11:21 AM
Comment #134374

Please lets let the Republicans pass this law… eventually the Democrats will use it to wiretap the NRA, white supremecist groups and other terrorist organizations in the U.S. The dems can also wiretap and surveil all the corrupt Republican politicians.

Then maybe we’ll be able to get all the guns off the street and rid ourselves of all the corrupt politicians.

You don’t have enough Dems to slap anybody down.

BTW Duano, there are more registered Democrats than registered Republicans… you’ll see that in 2006 and 2008.

Posted by: Pat at March 18, 2006 11:26 AM
Comment #134376

Elliot

I know we are above name calling, but sometimes it is hard. I like (although I disagree) with Feingold. He is a man of intelligence and integrity. Boxer and Conyer, however, are different stories. That anyone takes them seriously is beyond me and that evidently many people do is completely incomprehensible.

Posted by: Jack at March 18, 2006 11:33 AM
Comment #134378

jack……and you can actually sit there and say that is any less believable than taking seriously the current Bushco????? Now THAT is incomprehensible !!!

Posted by: Sandra Davidson at March 18, 2006 12:06 PM
Comment #134394

tony:
“I’d rather do something that really works - like taking back the Senate and House and then having a Bush-beenie-weenie roast.”
ohrealy:
“Adrienne, I do not see how Feingold will be able to get anywhere until after we get a new Congress.”

I know this censure won’t truly accomplish anything. It isn’t meant to. But it is a very strong statement — an acknowledgement that Democrats are fully aware that this president is completely and totally out of control.
After watching the Republicans move in perfect goosestep since well before 2000, I think for once it would be fantastic to see the Dems get their tails out from between their legs and make some kind of a bold, courageous statement and do so ALL TOGETHER.

I think that this is the very moment to do it (with all of his numbers so shockingly low), and that our Constitution deserves no less than such an action from the opposition party.

Posted by: Adrienne at March 18, 2006 1:55 PM
Comment #134398

If not now, when? Take back the Congress standing for what? Spinelessness? A party that won’t even stand up to a President who has deliberately manipulated information to lead us into an unplanned and illegal war, illegally (ask any outside legal expert) wiretapped American citizens, stripped our bill of rights, holds the constitution in disdain as a mere ‘piece of paper’, blocks oversight in favor of overlooking, and repeatedly lies (katrina, wmds, no intelligence on al qaeda,torture). This is an administration that has systematically failed us on every level both domestic and foreign. It’s time to say ‘enough’.

If there isn’t a single legislator willing to stand up against something so egregious, we’ve truly lost the center of our country.

I don’t care if the GOP-controlled Congress votes it down. The message was sent loud and clear.

And by the poll numbers, I’d say most of America agrees - enough already.

Posted by: Kira at March 18, 2006 2:44 PM
Comment #134406

Wow. I think we should hang Bush right now. You guys seem to have it all figured out.

We had a major new network that used forged documents before an election to try to bring him down. If Bush had taken the Bill of Rights/Constitution and soiled them. Soiled Them! Then why wouldn’t they be digging up the proof? Where is the washington post and Bob Woodward?

I usually get 2 answers to this….
1. The new networks are owned by corporations that are beholdin to the Rep party.

2. The forged documents were a plant by the Rove/CIA to discredit the news media and keep them going after the “real” stories.

Posted by: JimmyRay at March 18, 2006 3:21 PM
Comment #134407

Russ Feingold’s proposal is mild but, right on!
I think the president has exceeded his authority in all of his hunt’em down and hang’um activities. He is the worst president in my 64 year life.

Posted by: William Pope at March 18, 2006 3:24 PM
Comment #134410

Tony:

The Democratic message is we want to protect the Constitution by upholding the Bill of Rights. Doing this will help Democrats gain more votes in this year’s election.

Many of you have things backwards. You can’t concentrate on winning an election unless you stand for something. Fighting for censure - win or lose - demonstrates that you do stand for something: the Constitution.

Posted by: Paul Siegel at March 18, 2006 3:36 PM
Comment #134413

The heart of the issue here is law enforcement. The President broke the law. Democrats nor Republicans in Congress on the whole are willing to assume their responsibility to EnFORCE the law. It is more politically expedient to forgive the law breaking and change the law so the illegal act is no longer illegal.

Keep it up, and revolution will revisit America far sooner than anyone thinks. You can’t throw people in jail for posession of Marijuana and forgive presidents for violations of the law and abject failure to uphold their oath to protect and defend the Constitution which includes all the laws that ensue from it.

There was a King in England named George who had one set of rules for himself, namely he makes them up as he goes, another set for the nobles, and a third set for everyone else. We kicked his ass out of his colonies and declared them our own. Now we are supporting the same kind of regime where the laws only have consequence for the poor and powerless, yet again, just like King George.

The Democratic Party is no better than the Republican Party when it comes to greed and power and abuse of others to keep it. I have been saying that for years, and Democrats continue to prove the verity of that statement.

Posted by: David R. Remer at March 18, 2006 3:50 PM
Comment #134419

///
David R. Remer,
In King Georges time, about 500 individuals controlled virtually all the seats in Parliament, and most of the economic activity of the country.
The tax policies of the Rpblcns look like that is where our country is going. Everyone else will be working on the plantation for the wealthiest asset owners.

This is not intended as sarcasm or an exaggeration. In the last 5 years, almost all of the work that I have been offered is in the wealthiest parts of the wealthiest suburbs in my area. Yesterday I was offered another job in the same area. This is where the money is concentrating.

I have nothing against any of these people. They were in fact mostly liberal democrats, although I worked for one person who voted for GWBush because he was born in New Haven, and another who thought FNN was a news network and not a screech monkey torture fest.

The law enforcement issue is one of the most irritating. We have an entire gulag full of people who will never get out of prison alive. Many are from foreign countries to which they can not return.

In Florida, I met a person who got 20 years house arrest for manslaughter, and one of the county commissioners got 2 years for the premeditated murder of his wife. People without their connections, would have been rotting in jail for decades.

What kind of system are we running here? Revolution for the hell of it, Hell Yes!

I think we should hang Bush right now
Okay, but he is usually the one doing the hanging. In fact, he was elected in a 0 year and is in the 6th year of his term without meeting his lone gunman. Maybe its because the lone gunmen all work for Bushco.

Posted by: ohrealy at March 18, 2006 5:02 PM
Comment #134422

….I am a Liberal, registered Democrat, supporter of the Party….and etc, but if this doesn’t look like a bad script, I don’t know what does. We’re standing in front of the castle, welcome mat out, door wide open and the path strewn with rose petals and we can’t figure out who’s going in first !!! AT this point, almost anything we do will be a move in the right direction, but standing here with our *#@%*s in our hands is suicidal.
There is a censure resoloution in the works, and I think we need to get behind Feingold to support it! Sign whatever, or call or write whomever to show we’re behind his efforts……. Start talking to family, friends, neighbors….get people onboard for local elections. We’ve got to clean house ! Coming in here and arguing, whining, fighting over the issues is still little more than apathy unless and until we make a move!!!

Posted by: Sandra Davidson at March 18, 2006 5:55 PM
Comment #134428

“Tony:

The Democratic message is we want to protect the Constitution by upholding the Bill of Rights. Doing this will help Democrats gain more votes in this year’s election.

Many of you have things backwards. You can’t concentrate on winning an election unless you stand for something. Fighting for censure - win or lose - demonstrates that you do stand for something: the Constitution.”

My problem with this argument is, unless you own the marbles, you don’t get to play the game. This is not about letting bygones be bygones, it’s about setting ourselves up to actually doing something about what has gone on over the past 5 years.

First - the censure is guilt before proof - which flies in the face of our Constitution. No matter how damning the evidence against someone is, as an American they still get their day in court. I think we should investigate, prosecute and the kick his ass out of office. The censure if going about this backwards, and people will see it that way.

Two - a censure does not serve proper justice and it would be seen as trying to prosecute twice for the same crime if we censure now and then try to prosecute later. Bush broke a serious law - not some Congressional rule of conduct. He should not be slapped on the wrist, he should be fired and go down in the history books that way. I can not accept a censure as adequate punishment for Bush, and trying and failing at a censure would be a slap in the face.

We all know what needs to happen to Bush, I am simply saying that we focus on the goal at hand, which is rarely the most expedient approach. If you want Bush to pay, then let’s layout a plan to make sure it’s a procedural slap on the wrist…

Posted by: tony at March 18, 2006 8:31 PM
Comment #134429

“The censure if going about this backwards, and people will see it that way.”

should read - IS going about this backwards

“If you want Bush to pay, then let’s layout a plan to make sure it’s a procedural slap on the wrist…”

should be: MORE than a slap on the wrist.


(sheeesh…my typing sux)

Posted by: tony at March 18, 2006 8:33 PM
Comment #134432

Oversight is part of the job both partys
are elected to do.

Do Your Job or Get Out.

The Law is the Law the People
must follow it and so should
The President.

Posted by: Honey P at March 18, 2006 9:19 PM
Comment #134434

Yes - I agree what everyone should be held to the law. But I also think we should approach this as a criminal case, not one of vengance. We know the law was probably broken, so let’s take it to court. Innocent until proven guilty - even for those we do not like - is still the base for our law.

Posted by: tony at March 18, 2006 9:25 PM
Comment #134437

I think it’s about time that we stop worrying about what these people on the right think. If you want a clear answer to that, you’ll find the majority of them have little in the way of respect for our beliefs. What the hell do we have to gain by catering to THAT opinion?

We don’t have to get as obnoxious, as power obsessed or whatever as the Republicans are. No, what we have to do is not shrink from the risk of being criticized and second guessed. They can call us whatever names they want to, just look at what they’ve done! They can claim we’re inferior to them, but look at what they’ve allowed to happen!

Open your eyes people. Look around you. Most of America is not happy with things the way they are. A critical mass of dissatisfaction has been reached. These Republicans and Right-Wingers are out of touch with what’s really happening, and they’re so ensnared in their ideology that they don’t even realize the depths of their screw ups anymore.

The time has come to make a serious effort to change things for the better. We have to start pushing them back and start doing what they have failed to do: take care of the people’s business.

Support Feingold. Support the rule of law. Do what the majority of Americans want us to do: take power from these people who have been abusing it. Using warrantless searches to protect Americans, with FISA and the Fourth Amendment on the books, is not unlike employing ranks of suicide bombers in your force as a defense against the enemy. It’s constitutional self-mutilation that I think the country is strong enough, and our investigators adept enought to do without it, and don’t let any panicked appeals about the absolute defense of America tell you otherwise. There is no absolute defense, even those that become so intrusive that they turn their nations into prisons for their citizens. There is a point where we must either choose liberty and the threat of death, or tyranny and the false promises of total security.

Even if we make a fortress of America, we will be vulnerable from some direction. Seeing as how the possibility of an attack remains, I would rather die free in a terrorist attack, then die a pathetic victim of both my own government and the terrorists at once.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at March 18, 2006 9:36 PM
Comment #134451

Now if Democrats in the leadership of the party would walk your talk, Stephen, Democrats would be in control again by 2008. You have the words down. But your party doesn’t have the committment to walk the talk.

Is your party willing to secure our borders against illegal immigrants and deport illegal immigrants already here? That is one of those things the majority of Americans want. They don’t want one set of laws enforced against them while illegal immigrants get a free pass for breaking the laws.

And this is the problem with your party. They have alleigiance to getting reelected first and foremost and equal and fair application of the law for all takes a back seat. Your party will never agree to alienate Hispanic voters by choosing to treat illegal immigrants a lawbreakers. Your party has no more principle or spine than the Republican Party has.

Posted by: David R. Remer at March 18, 2006 11:18 PM
Comment #134466

I really wish that the Democratic Party would stand up and fight for what they really believe rather than playing the political game. I really think that many Americans would support a Russ F. for President, but the sad truth is that this guy is not going to get any support from the party. I think he is the only hope in 08’, but we aren’t smart enough to take a chance. Look at why Republicans took over in 94’. They provided alternatives…when are the Democrats going to stop playing moderate politics and provide a true alternative????? I have been waiting for years for someone like Russ to come along, but our system is so messed up that he really doesn’t have a chance. That is sad to me. The only hope that I have in the whole thing is that I am from Wisconsin and I am very proud to say that my Senator is one that has some backbone.

Posted by: Lee Thennes at March 19, 2006 12:16 AM
Comment #134471

Good replies, Paul and Stephen.

Tony, obviously you disagree, but I think it could only make the Dems look stronger to support this censure in a fully unified manner.
No matter which way you look at this, Bush had already been breaking the law for years while at the very same time lying in all his public speeches by invoking FISA as a reassurance. That shows he knows that what he was/is doing is totally illegal. And it is exactly why he began changing his rationale(s) when the truth came out. The Republicans now trying to make what he did legal after the fact cannot be viewed in any other way than as an admission of this guilt.
Therefore, Feingold (and many, many other people in this country) knows that censure is at the very least warranted.

IF the Dems win in November they can move foward with an in-depth investigation (yet, with the state of our elections in such dissarray, who knows whether or not the GOP will once more gain seats rather than lose them?). But what seems very clear to me is that if the Democrats do absolutely nothing to address this situtation now, they’ve completely blown the opportunity to show the American people that they fully understand the illegality of Bush breaking with FISA (a secret court, for crying out loud!), and the violations of our rights that we know have already occurred.

Posted by: Adrienne at March 19, 2006 12:50 AM
Comment #134477

I thoroughly and strongly agree with the censure effort put forth by Feingold. I agree that it is not nearly enough. Under this president, we’ve racked up a totally unacceptable debt, that I and my children will have to pay off. If we had a few more strong leaders in the democratic party we could easily not only elect a democratic president, but take back control of the house and senate. I believe that the senators and others in the party who come out in support of the censure, and hopefully an impeachment, will gain credibility on really trying to fix problems. We need more leaders in the party who are willing to do that - without it, the party will continue to flounder and lose voters to moderate republicans because of fancy campaigns and empty rhetoric. Where is our next Bill Clinton? Its time for more democrats to step up to the plate, like Feingold, instead of worrying about their mid-term elections. We need to regain control of our party, and take pride in being liberals - across the board. I sincerely hope that more than just a handful of politicians will call for bush’s censure - and IMPEACHMENT. He rose to office by the court system, and now, is trying to bend the courts and congess by making his illegal actions legal. Where is his faith in our democratic process?

Posted by: Jennifer H. at March 19, 2006 1:32 AM
Comment #134480

I would have to agree with the rest of the Dems. When you talk about censure or impeachment, the act itself becomes the issue. Bush is on the ropes, I’d say keep him there. Instead of talking censure or impeachment, I’d be talking about a full investigation into the administration’s handling of Iraq from when they took office. Demand documents that we know the Bushies won’t give up. They’ll seriously be hurting and maybe the American people will put pressure on congressional Republicans to echo Democratic demands, hurting the President and splintering his party, which, let’s face it, they’ve shown alot more party discipline up till now then Democrats have shown.

Posted by: Kris F. at March 19, 2006 1:45 AM
Comment #134484

I vow to notify my Congress-folk that my wish is ‘censure’ until or unless the Democrats gain enough strength in November to begin impeachment procedings.

I vow to encourage all our Democrat ‘leaders’ to grow enough cajones to stand up for what is right (not far right), even if they think it might cost them some support this fall.

I vow, starting now, to allow Republican posters to say any outragous thing and not respond, because it is their aim to distract good people from honest goals.

Posted by: Marysdude at March 19, 2006 1:55 AM
Comment #134499

Democrats can’t become the party of the people until they embrace the people’s agenda. The polls are there. You only have to read them to know what the people’s agenda is. But too many Democrats in leadership don’t want the people’s agenda.

The people’s agenda according to polls:

-Put a halt to illegal immigration.
-Deport Illegals as lawbreakers.
-End the deficit spending and sprialling debt WITHOUT raising taxes on the people.
-End the corruption. The lobbyist, wealthy donor bribery system of politicians. Lobbyists are supposed to state their consitutents case to politicians which can be done by phone, letter, or personal visit. Campaign donations, exotic trips and vacations, free use of lobbyists jets, etc. are nothing but legal bribery which renders the people’s voice mute.
-End the pork barrel spending and the Congressional rules that allow it to be slipped unnoticed into bigger bills in order to hide it. End omnibus bills which are the preferred method of Democrats and Republicans to waste all American’s tax dollars for a the benefit of a few back home.
-End the Iraq war.
-Get the Government OUT OF THE MORALITY business.
-Develop a plan to restore security to American jobs again.
-Halt the medical cost inflation of 15% to 20% per year.
-Force other nation’s onto level competitive platforms with American employers or end trade with them.
-Move to a fair and equl tax system, so everyone pays the same rate.
-Restore American schools to the status of the best in the world.
-Make the necessary changes to the Soc. Sec. system NOW to preserve it investor’s retirement years.

These are the majority of the American’s agenda. Can the DNC and DLC embrace this agenda? So far, the answer is NO! And that’s why they are out of power.

Posted by: David R. Remer at March 19, 2006 6:13 AM
Comment #134513

I feel strange by not agreeing with Stephen and Adrienne - but I think the Censure measure is the wrong thing to go after. It’s not nearly and had no chance of passing. To me, this will take one of the few DEMs with a backbone and making a defeat for him - weakening him politically. Also, would a censure now be the end of this debate? Once it’s done, would it prevent actual prosecution/impeachment? That’s my worry.

I agree that our DEM leaders must find the spines and get proactive - if not, they need to be replaced.

Posted by: tony at March 19, 2006 10:06 AM
Comment #134517

Jack,

Boxer and Conyer Frist and Delay, however, are different stories. That anyone takes them seriously is beyond me and that evidently many people do is completely incomprehensible.

Posted by: ElliottBay at March 19, 2006 10:31 AM
Comment #134518

I need a lawyer….making something previously illegal legal does not make the previous action legal does it… Isn’t this sort of ex post facto (?) in reverse

Posted by: dan at March 19, 2006 10:37 AM
Comment #134522

“I need a lawyer….making something previously illegal legal does not make the previous action legal does it… Isn’t this sort of ex post facto (?) in reverse”

I will be amazed if this legislation passes - it will be even more “if your face” than the REPs passing the measure to allow their Speaker (Delay) to remain in power even if he faced indictment. I think most people would see this as BS and would call the REPs on it. Can anyone imagine the press and the average American sitting on their hands with something this audacious?

Posted by: tony at March 19, 2006 10:48 AM
Comment #134527

Someone from the Rep actually got caught shoplifting? What they didn’t steal enough already?? Democrats have nothing to stand on is right. All talk..no action. Repub=Corporate America. I’m with the guy on the Socialist Party.

Posted by: J Van Dyke at March 19, 2006 11:11 AM
Comment #134537

Tony,
This censure never had a chance to actually pass in the Senate and Feingold knew this. But that was never the point.
The point is if all of the Dems signed on to this, it would automatically send the message to the people that they know and agree with how we feel about the president breaking the law and violating the Bill of Rights. (Perhaps it might also make the Republicans squirm? Who knows.)
That is why I feel all of us should be supporting this censure, and why we should be writing all the Senators on the left, encouraging them to stop being wimps and sign on.

Posted by: Adrienne at March 19, 2006 11:23 AM
Comment #134540

I’d like to make another point in defense of my position, ie: staying focused on winning as many seats in the House and Senate as possible this year. This is a quote by Feingold in a March 16 press conference:

“I think this actually is in the area of an impeachable offense. I think it is right in the strike zone of what the founding fathers thought about when they talked about high crimes and misdemeanors.

But the Constitution does not require us to go down that road, and I hope that in a sense I’m a voice of moderation on this point, where I’m saying it may not be good for the country to do this, it may not be good for the country in a time of war to try to remove the president from office, even though he’s surely done something wrong.”

One more time:
“I hope that in a sense I’m a voice of moderation on this point, where I’m saying it may not be good for the country to do this, it may not be good for the country in a time of war to try to remove the president from office”.

These are Feingold’s own words. The full text is here:
http://feingold.senate.gov/~feingold/statements/06/03/2006316.html

Well, I want more than this, much more. I do want a full investigation and, if found appropriate, impeachment.

More importantly I want a strong enough Democratic presence in the Congress by this time next year to begin to stop or at least slow the “bleeding” of our troops, our natural and financial resources, and the Constitution itself. It will take decades to fix everything Bush & Co. have broken. The sooner we can get started the better.

KansasDem

Posted by: KansasDem at March 19, 2006 11:34 AM
Comment #134549

“I feel strange by not agreeing with Stephen and Adrienne”

Tony,

I do too, and yet I believe one of our parties greatest strengths is in the ability to disagree without deriding the opinions of the other.

IMO there has been a sort of “creepy” aura surrounding the Republican party for quite some time. Sort of like they’re all marching in step with each other and you seldom see any meaningful debate within their own ranks.

I wouldn’t want to see our party begin to even remotely resemble that. It is possible to disagree and still have absolute respect for another person and their views.

KansasDem

Posted by: KansasDem at March 19, 2006 12:00 PM
Comment #134551

A censure for breaking the law? Why not impeach?

Posted by: David at March 19, 2006 12:10 PM
Comment #134554

“IMO there has been a sort of “creepy” aura surrounding the Republican party for quite some time. Sort of like they’re all marching in step with each other and you seldom see any meaningful debate within their own ranks.”

Yep… they have everything but the bedsheets.

Posted by: tony at March 19, 2006 12:24 PM
Comment #134576

The censure vote was the best.
The Specter committee will not do anything regarding any illegal things Bush may have done.
The GOP refuses to even consider it. I am so proud of my democracy, which promotes open investigations.
As the world feels sorry for the American individual, it dispises Bush and the GOp almost as much as every other dictator that has come along.
One nice thing about living in Wisconsin,
He’ll get my vote again.

Posted by: Joe at March 19, 2006 1:31 PM
Comment #134581

>>A censure for breaking the law? Why not impeach?

Posted by: David at March 19, 2006 12:10 PM

David,

Impeachment is impossible while Repubs hold this great a majority in the House. Censure is unlikely as well, but would set the groundwork for later action if we regain either house of Congress this fall. Censure works whether it passes or fails. The groundwork is set either way.

Posted by: Marysdude at March 19, 2006 1:50 PM
Comment #134583

………AND….it shows we’re willing to at least do SOMETHING rather than just talk ourselves to death without action…

Posted by: Sandra Davidson at March 19, 2006 2:05 PM
Comment #134596

Reading these comments makes me sure that my prediction of the U.S. having another civil war true. I believe that we will split into at least two seperate countries if not three. If conservatives cannot admit that Bush broke the law, even after he admitted he did, then it will all come down to fighting in the streets. I just wonder if all of the Bush supporters will still think it was worth it when our major cities are all in ruin and everyone is having to move to a place where everyone thinks just like them.

Posted by: Robert Phillips at March 19, 2006 3:59 PM
Comment #134622

“I vow, starting now, to allow Republican posters to say any outragous thing and not respond, because it is their aim to distract good people from honest goals.

Posted by: Marysdude at March 19, 2006 01:55 AM”

I’m with you 100% on that point.
KansasDem

Posted by: KansasDem at March 19, 2006 6:17 PM
Comment #134634

They just keep responding to eachother when we do not respond to them. I think it would be helpful if the format could be set up so that the name of the poster was at the top of the post instead of the bottom. If I see that a post seems out of place, I skip down to the end to see who posted it. I do not read most of the right wing posts unless they are very short.

Posted by: ohrealy at March 19, 2006 7:31 PM
Comment #134653

The Democrats are cowards and the RepubliCLONES are bullies. Cowards and Bullies running the government of the USA, didn’t cowards and bullies always act criminal when you were a kid?

Posted by: moksha at March 19, 2006 8:45 PM
Comment #134691

Jack,

The dismissive tone of your comments in this thread are actually making me a little angry. I guess that I expect better from you. I am a little disappointed. While I hardily disagree with almost everything that you believe, I had come to respect you as being apparently intelligent and articulate - not so in this thread. You have not made any articulate, intelligent responses to the many good points made by myself and others in this thread. It appears that you are just blowing a smoke screen, and “spinning” the same worn, misleading, and demonstrably false Republican talking points on this issue.

Posted by: Ray G. at March 19, 2006 11:18 PM
Comment #134692

I am glad to see that so many regulars on this board are finally agreeing that it makes no sense to reply to right-wing postings. There are plenty of centrists, and even a few honest conservatives who make positive contributions to these boards, but the others simply waste our time.

May I suggest that we start discussing specific proposals for governance under a Democratic leadership? We talk a lot about spineless Democrats in Congress, but those we decry need to hear less ranting about the Bush League and more about what we will support in the way of solutions. We cannot expect Reid, Pelosi, et al, to herd cats, which is what we act like when we argue over details before agreeing on principles. When the Center makes up its mind, the natural leaders come forward.

Getting large numbers of grass-roots Democratic voters behind specific proposals for reform can help solidify a 2006 interim elections platform and also create a foundation for a consensus platform in 2008. If we get the platform in place, the most effective candidate to implement that platform is more likely to emerge. Leave the platform for the end, and we will likely see another incoherent nomination campaign.

Whatever conversations we have here we should share on other progressive and centrist boards and blogs. With the proper motivation and persistent discipline, progressives and centrists can build a solid grassroots platform in time for the Fall campaign.

Posted by: Robert Benjamin at March 19, 2006 11:22 PM
Comment #134695

///Banned but still posting with another email address, we hear our opposition every day, just by listening to the media, mostly Rpblcn owned or intimidated by them into presenting the right wing agenda. I have to listen to and read the BBC just to get a middle of the road perspective. We never hear from the real left in the media at all.

Are we still bombing Vietnam? I know someone who travels to Thailand for his vacation every year. The year before the tsunami, he also went to Cambodia and Vietnam. He is a veteran, and it was a strong emotional experience for him. He swore it would be the last trip, but he went again the next year. Closure never comes.
///

Posted by: ohrealy at March 19, 2006 11:37 PM
Comment #134698

Robert:

Articulate as ever—thanks! Here are some ideas that I think should be in the Democratic platform:

1. All military forces out of Iraq within 8-12 months. No permanent bases in Iraq. (As for “there’ll be a civil war if we leave” argument, there’ll be a civil war if we stay—hell, I think there’s one going on now.)

2. National, portable health care for everyone within 2 years. By fixing this country’s medical care system, we help countless millions—and make American business more competitive by taking that burden from them, and not making decent health care job-related.

3.An immeditate freeze on all fiscal increases in the budget, freeze all tax cuts, while we take stock of where this country is financially.

4.Close down Abu Graib and other black holes of torture. Immediately.

5. Conduct immediate Congressional inquiries into the FISA surveillence mess. If laws were broken, open impeachment hearings.

6. Conduct immediate Congressional investigations into the run-up to the Iraq invasion—if laws were broken, if intelligence was manipulated, if the people were lied to, open impeachment proceedings. Then prosecute the guilty.

7. Initiate government-paid elections for 2008. No PAC money, no private or corporate money in politics at all. Eliminate all Diebold equipment immediately, and any other election equipment with proprietary information that is not transparent. Establish more equitable laws for the possibility of third-party cannidates.

There, that’s a start. Fire away, everyone.

Posted by: Tim Crow at March 20, 2006 12:01 AM
Comment #134711

Tim Crow,

Bring back tariffs for two reasons…

1. Relieve pressures on income taxation.

2. Level the playing field on nations that tariff us and/or use slave/child labor.

Have the ACLU rewrite FISA rules to eliminate the loop-holes Cheney/Bush used to circumnavagate them.

Posted by: Marysdude at March 20, 2006 2:49 AM
Comment #134712

>>Let the Dems try to explain why they don’t want the president to listen in on terrorist.

Jack,

For the last time (I am not reading any more of your posts…period), NO ONE CARES IF KING GEORGE LISTENS IN ON TERRORIST COMMUNICATIONS! But, he can and should have obeyed the law while doing so and he COULD have. He CHOSE not to. He CHOSE to break the law, and while he was at it he made it IMPOSSIBLE to tell whether or not he was also spying on Americans without a legal warrant. That’s the end of my responses to you…

Posted by: Marysdude at March 20, 2006 2:56 AM
Comment #134733

Boomerang-
It’s nice to see that when confronted by evidence of your own party’s wrongdoing, your response is to appeal to imagined wrongdoing on the part of our last president. That “Vince Foster was murdered” bullshit was part of what made me become a Democrat. The exploitation of his suicide was sick. Clinton was no angel, but he at least ran the government with some degree of skill and competence.

As for Al Qaeda, I know this will offend your sense of inherent Republican superiority on national defense, but there are a shitload of real, constitutionally sound things that this government could be doing to protect us. There are also constitutional means of doing precisely what it is you speak of. Unfortunately, you and this president seem to believe than any system where somebody can tell them no is a threat to our security.

What you fail to understand is that the lack of oversight, combined with the lack of checks and balances, means that if the President is wrong, nothing is there to bar him from proceeding with his errors, and wasting our time, effort, and resources in the process. Then his idiocy becomes a threat itself to our country, and we have no means short of disruptive government shakeups to end that threat.

The trick of the intelligence failure in Iraq is that many people were coming to the conclusion that the WMD situation in Iraq was not the threat claimed. Even your own Republican led congressional committee on the issues found that there wasn’t real evidence for more than one of your key claims about the dangers posed.

The Simple fact is, there were conclusions that Bush and his people, regardless of their intentions, wanted to hear. They encouraged their subordinates to filter out information and qualifiers that didn’t suit their case, instead of encouraging them to come up with the plain unvarnished truth. They started preparing for this war before they even had word on whether the reason for starting this war even existed. Whatever they were trying to do, they hamstrung us the moment they started down that path.

You fail to even consider that your failures could be self-inflicted, and that such failures could earn the legitimate resentment of those who don’t share your partisan vision of America. This is what is shifting the momentum in our direction, and what may very well bring runaway success, if we can just get some people in Washington off their dead asses.

For years, those people sat in the shadow of Republican successes, trying to imitate them in order to draw the voter’s approval to them. Little did they realize that practically every success of the Republican party would turn out to be the seeds of its current decay and paralysis.

We need to get over the little inferiority complex that the contract with America left us Democrats with. Now’s the time to realize that many Americans are ready to return to a time when it mattered whether the Government functioned correctly, to the sense of purpose and ethics that once held the worst parts of our nature in check. People are tired of this all being everybody for themselves and God against all. Unfortunately for you, the Republicans seem to be the last people to bring our country back to a state of grace.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at March 20, 2006 10:26 AM
Comment #134742

Don’t worry Jack,

We’re going to take down that scumbag for his deceiving the people, breaking the law, incompetence and other things. If not now with Feigngold than after we take over congress. We’ll get Cheney at the same time, and the next guy in line will forego the nicety of a pardoning them. Honestly, it’s not enough to make up for the lives they took and putting all our children into debt, but at least we’ll have a smidgeon of justice and people around the world will know that not all Americans are suckers.

Posted by: Max at March 20, 2006 12:25 PM
Comment #134749

Max
“We’re going to take down that scumbag for his deceiving the people, breaking the law, incompetence and other things”

Leave clinton out of this.
This thread is about crucifying Bush with unproven facts and dreaming of feingold saving the US.

If you can’t see the Speculation, Hope, Intelligence and Trust that liberals offer, as being the ONLY way to freedom, then you are part of the problem.

Posted by: kctim at March 20, 2006 12:46 PM
Comment #134752

Fiengolds censure,though accurate,is not timely. Of more pressing issues is the apparent delusion of bushco. that things are just peachy in iraq. more gis,maybe many more will die because of it. The country needs congress to step forward NOW and remove this out of touch and out of bounds cabal.

Posted by: bills at March 20, 2006 12:54 PM
Comment #134756

Wow, Stephen, that was eloquent. Congratulations, and well-spoken.

Posted by: Tim Crow at March 20, 2006 1:15 PM
Comment #134759

Stephen,

Your response to Boomerang’s posting was solid and devastating. My only problem with it was that you spent all that intelligence and energy dignifying something unworthy of your effort. We have to learn to ignore them and focus on what a Democratic Congress and Administration can and should do.

I liked what Tim Crow and Marysdude had to say. I am looking for broad policy principles in the specific proposals being put forward here and elsewhere. So far, here is what I see:

1. Putting our fiscal house in order. No responsible parent mortgages his children’s financial future by borrowing and spending uncontrollably. We must learn to pay as we go, with the burden of taxes fairly shared by all.

2. Guaranteeing availability of health care, through portable health insurance available to all regardless of income, age or medical condition.

3. Infusing integrity into government operations and policymaking.

4. Restoring and reinforcing the integrity of elections at all levels of government.

5. Strengthening our national defense, by securing vulnerable facilities, restoring our reputation with our allies, improving our ability to collect and manage intelligence, and guaranteeing that our first-responders and military will not come second to tax cuts.

6. Manage the impact of globalization by investing in national competitiveness.

7. Save the planet from ideological delusions, theological obsessions, and corporate greed.

Posted by: Robert Benjamin at March 20, 2006 1:30 PM
Comment #134773

“I do not read most of the right wing posts unless they are very short.”

No wonder you have been making little or no sence in the:
The Hinge of The Door post.
http://www.watchblog.com/democrats/archives/003346.html

It has been rather interesting for those of you who like a good debate. It is a few days old and it has only been three of us for a few days but it has been good debate.

Posted by: Scott at March 20, 2006 3:09 PM
Comment #134775

Robert Benjamin:

“There are plenty of centrists, and even a few honest conservatives who make positive contributions to these boards, but the others simply waste our time.”

I’m not a Centrist. I’m a Liberal. The Democratic party has moved to the Center and has been losing elections. Isn’t it’s time to dump the wimpy cowering Centrists, move back toward the Left, and start winning again? Is it a waste anyones time for me to say that? I don’t think so. I think it’s pretty obvious that voters can’t tell the difference between Republican, and Republican Lite, so they’ve just been voting Republican.

Btw, here is the GOP strategy for November according to Fred Barnes (no doubt we’ll be seeing plenty of this reflected in postings within the Rose Colored column):
Change the Subject
The Republican strategy for 2006.

Not surprisingly, it’s all about the wedge issues which divide people, rather than anything important.

Posted by: Adrienne at March 20, 2006 3:18 PM
Comment #134782

i just read most of the text of sandra day o’connor about her fears of the republican party and the presidency becoming a dictatorship. why hasn’t this speeh been given any press? what do you think? I think of her as pretty moderate and midling politically. This seemed very far-reaching to me and putting herself way out there.

Posted by: judge at March 20, 2006 3:38 PM
Comment #134785

Vince Foster went to kindergarten with WJClinton. There is a picture of their class in My Life. The Arkansas Project, funded by Richard Mellon Scaife, was one of the worst conspiracies in the history of our country. The people who made up the stories are the devil.

Posted by: ohrealy at March 20, 2006 3:45 PM
Comment #134787

“I think it’s pretty obvious that voters can’t tell the difference between Republican, and Republican Lite, so they’ve just been voting Republican.”

Why vote faux when you can have the “real” thing, huh?

I agree with you, Adrienne—the entire political conversation for the last 25 years has been dragged to the right. Which puts most Dems center to center-right. One of my favorite quotes regarding this phenomenon is by Jim Hightower:
“The only thing you find in the center is yellow stripes and dead armadillos.” The longer the Repubs run things into the ground and the Dems cower in the shadows, the further left I move—I’m looking into the Socialist Worker’s Party now.

Posted by: Tim Crow at March 20, 2006 3:53 PM
Comment #134790

Adrienne, Tim Crow
Just curious here, do you believe middle America Dems would also like to see the Democratic party move further left?

Posted by: kctim at March 20, 2006 4:09 PM
Comment #134795

The only reason someone is more concerned about our citizens rights than our actual freedom, our semi-safe peaceful living and Home Land Security is that they must have been at the wrong place at the wrong time and wrong reason.

My childs safty as well as every child in the US deserves to feel safe as we do/did. It is bad enough we have to worry about sex preditors, indoctrination, intentional repression and interpretation games, but suicide bombings hitting homes and families that have nothing to do with the political area and national decision making IS WRONG.

WHY TAKE A CHANCE, WHY TEAR OUR COUNTY APART - OH IT’S NOTHING PERSONNAL I’M SURE

Posted by: Bernadette Rodts at March 20, 2006 4:25 PM
Comment #134796

it has been good debate, Posted by: Scott at March 20, 2006 03:09 PM

There was no debate at all, merely two people trying to explain reality to a very confused individual.

Posted by: ohrealy at March 20, 2006 4:28 PM
Comment #134797

I don’t know how the far left can say fiscal responsibility and universal health care in the same breath.
They probably can’t understand that people will take advantage of something if it’s continually handed to them. Or perhaps that’s exactly what they want. Dependency.
I know a person who is on Social Security because of a corrective operation done in her teen years. She is using this operation as an excuse to not work and continue receiving Social Security, but she has no problem walking clear across town to buy a pack of cigarettes with that money.
She is taking advantage of a government handout and you can’t convince her otherwise.
You also can’t convince the far left that government isn’t the answer.

Posted by: Weary Willie at March 20, 2006 4:31 PM
Comment #134800

More on topic, Feingold and this whole wiretapping thing is pure politics

Posted by: Weary Willie at March 20, 2006 4:33 PM
Comment #134801

Tim Crow:
“The longer the Repubs run things into the ground and the Dems cower in the shadows, the further left I move—I’m looking into the Socialist Worker’s Party now.”

Personally I wish you wouldn’t, Tim. I myself went to the Greens for awhile, but since I didn’t agree with enough of what they were saying, they didn’t keep me there for very long.
The fact that the Senate Dems wouldn’t join Feingold is what finally made me decide to fight for the soul of my life-long party. I re-registered last Friday as a Democrat, and my focus in doing so is to eventually see the backs of all the silent, fearful, ineffective Dem politicans who just didn’t have enough of a spine to stand up with an articulate, fearless, effective Senator like Feingold.
I honestly think it’s time that liberals drove the Republican Lite’s out of OUR party since all they know how to do is lose elections, and scatter liberals in every direction to other parties. IMO if we don’t start taking it back and begin moving it toward the left again, we don’t have a snowballs chance in hell of ever defeating the GOP. And isn’t it crystal clear that we simply HAVE to defeat them at this point, because they’re destroying our country?

Posted by: Adrienne at March 20, 2006 4:36 PM
Comment #134810

“There was no debate at all, merely two people trying to explain reality to a very confused individual.”

I do believe that stephen’s position and your position are rather opposite when it comes to the inspiration fo the scriptures.The debate between you and I comes down to you cannot find one source to prove your point while I have all sources yet found including your basic encyclopedia to back up my position.

People can look for them selves.
http://www.watchblog.com/democrats/archives/003346.html

Posted by: scott at March 20, 2006 5:27 PM
Comment #134818

Finally a source.
Finally a rebuttal!

Posted by: scott at March 20, 2006 5:49 PM
Comment #134819

kctim:
“Adrienne, Tim Crow
Just curious here, do you believe middle America Dems would also like to see the Democratic party move further left?”

I think it’s obvious that if the Dems want to win again they’re going to have to move back to the left. As it is, they’ve been attempting to stand in the middle of the road, which has amounted to getting run over in every single election.

Posted by: Adrienne at March 20, 2006 5:52 PM
Comment #134820

Adrienne
Ok. It was an honest question on my part.
I know MANY Dems here in the heartland, who would not vote for kerry because he was too liberal.
You’ve got to admit, there is a huge difference between SF Dems and middle America Dems and totally alienating one or the other again may not help the Dems get back in control.
Anyway, I was just curious. Thanks.

Posted by: kctim at March 20, 2006 6:09 PM
Comment #134840

How far left can we go? Dennis Kucinich?

KansasDem

Posted by: KansasDem at March 20, 2006 7:20 PM
Comment #134844

kctim:
“I know MANY Dems here in the heartland, who would not vote for kerry because he was too liberal.”

Democrats have always been all over the board in their opinions. We’re individuals, and like nothing better than to think for ourselves, rather than be dictated to, or follow some standardized set of talking points handed out by somebody else. But when people are too afraid to call themselves Liberals or Progressives because the GOP has tried to turn those into dirty words there is something very seriously wrong.
Democrats shouldn’t allow the opposition party to frighten them into feeling they have to qualify themselves as “Centrists” and “Moderates”. Seriously, if they are that worried about appeasing a few fence-sitters, it’s time for them to step aside, get in the back seat and allow those with passion, enthusiasm and vision to drive the bus to victory — because that’s what it takes move us to a win, rather than that kind of lukewarm uncertainty and tentativeness.

I’d be willing to bet that it really wasn’t Kerry being “too liberal” that put your friends off of him. I think it was because he seemed more worried about what the Republicans might say about him, than he did about getting his own ideas across.
Voters are attracted to assertiveness and boldness in their leaders, in my opinion.

Posted by: Adrienne at March 20, 2006 7:36 PM
Comment #134859

Wearywillie:

For every medical “welfare queen” story you come up with, I could probably outdo you with stories of hard-working people trying to raise a family that are being buried by healthcare costs. As I have said before during the bankruptcy debacle last year, statistics show that %75 of people that filed for bankruptcy because of a medical crisis HAD INSURANCE!! This isn’t about a free hand-out—this is about fixing a system that is broken. Not broken certainly for the pharmaceutical companies or the AMA, but for everybody else. As industialized countries go, we pay the most for health care and get the least for it. Fory-seven million without health care. It is unconscionable.

When the working class catches up to the hand-outs corporations and investors get, the tax breaks, the no-bid contracts, earmarks in legislation, the buying of government for greed—then we can talk about “welfare queens”!! The commonwealth, the sense of everybody is in it together will have to make a comeback—because this Economic Darwinian survival of the fittest is ruthless and cruel—and workers will not put up with it anymore.

Adrienne:

I’m very sympathetic to your plight. But I seem to be moving in the other direction. Sometime this week,I’m changing my political affiliation to independent (from Democratic: life-long, ‘till now). I guess it’s a matter of believing that the party can be changed in a meaningful way, or realizing that walking away may have it’s own rewards and revelations. I think at this point, the two-party system is broken—broken to the point that trying to fix it is, sadly, a waste of time. I would rather use my anger and frustration building a viable third party, if only to cover issues and policies in a different way.

The Socialists start from a point that I strongly agree with. Capitalism is inherently corrupt—it corrupts and destroys democracy, it destroys the environment, it destroys individual liberty. In short, it is unsustainable in every sense of that word. It has come to the point in human affairs that the only way we will survive as a species is by massive conservation, and capitalism is diametrically opposed to that. That is the choice, in my humble opinion—will we continue our cancerous capitalism and extinction, or leave the door open for something new, something that embraces life.

The two-party system, from what I see, is incapable of this kind of change. Capitalism has it by the throat.

Posted by: Tim Crow at March 20, 2006 8:04 PM
Comment #134956

Weary Willie,

Please. So you found one person who abuses SSI - and that’s a reason to set government policy in a completely unrelated field? It would be a shame if poor uninsured people actually used national health care instead of using hospital emergency rooms for basic health care? Do you actually think that we don’t wind up paying for their health care anyhow - through lower wages and higher health care premiums - lost life - lost productivity - money wasted on complicated health insurance administration - money wasted by doctors figuring out how to bill a complex myriad of health care plans - lost U.S. jobs - because corporations don’t have to pay health insurance premiums in Canada. Medicare is the most efficient medical insurance in the U.S. People in counties with national health care have longer life expectancies than people in the U.S. Developed countries like Canada manage to provide national health care for all of their people and still provide a good standard of living for their people. Why can’t the so called richest country in the world afford the same? Idiot. National health care would actually help to balance the budget. Further more Republicans that have supported Bush should be legally required to shut up about fiscal responsibility - bridges to no where - no bid contracts - Republicans who screamed bloody murder when Kerry suggested that the Iraq war would wind up costing 200 billion - when it has now been revealed that it is expected to cost at least 1 trillion - and you want to talk about fiscal responsibility - Republicans who gave a tax break to the rich which coincidentally happened to be exactly equal to the excess social security payroll taxes paid by the working class and then tried to steal our social security - and you want to talk about fiscal responsibility - please. Just Shut up.

Posted by: Ray G. at March 21, 2006 12:47 AM
Comment #134968

Adrienne
Thanks for taking the time and giving me your opinion.
Much appreciated.

Posted by: kctim at March 21, 2006 9:08 AM
Comment #135092

Ha Haaaa! I knew it, now you’re even deleting my posts now!! Ahhh, the hypocritical liberal machine and their pursuit of “free speech”. What a joke!!! You guys only want to hear lock and step liberalism. Hitler and Stalin are doing cartwheels in Hell right now laughing at the irony.

Okay, time to delete this post now … wouldn’t want to hear anything contradictory to “Blame America First Slef-Loathing American” liberalism!!

Posted by: Ken C. at March 21, 2006 6:48 PM
Comment #135268

Adrienne
“I think it was because he seemed more worried about what the Republicans might say about him, than he did about getting his own ideas across”

I dont think so. I think the heartland Dems are different than east or west coast Dems and that the Dem party better be aware of that if they want their votes.
Hoping they would vote for a liberal because its not a Republican seems risky to me. Especially if you value them.

KansasDem
Is it possible for a candidate to be too liberal to earn your vote?

Posted by: kctim at March 22, 2006 12:46 PM
Comment #135854

I watched Senator Feingold on The Daily Show with Jon Stewart and think he’s Presidential material. We may finally have found a man with conviction and courage.

Posted by: Duke at March 25, 2006 1:59 PM
Post a comment