Feingold, Cantwell, Sanders opposed Bailout

Senator Russ Feingold of Wisconsin was one of 25 senators (see below) who voted against the government bailout package. Maria Cantwell of Washington State also voted Nay, and made an attempt to improve the existing plan (she was apparently ignored.)

By coincidence (or not,) Feingold used to be described as the 'poorest' man in the Senate - the one who won't accept lobbyist gifts, isn't a billionaire - or even a millionaire - and who won't even allow friends to buy him dinner. Feingold can't be bought. Imagine if we had a senate full of men of his caliber.

Of the freshmen senators, Tester and Independent Bernie Sanders (both voted against the bailout,) are probably the most economically in sync with angry taxpayers... and perhaps more in touch with the pain out here.

From a Forbes article "Meet Senator Millionaire":

Not all the freshmen senators have struck gold, however. Jon Tester, the flat-topped senator-elect from Montana, is as humble as his man-of-the-people image suggests.

He told The New York Times that he has earned barely $20,000 a year farming in the last decade. Aside from his ranch, which is valued at $600,000 to $1 million, he owns shares in just one stock, American Electric Power, and a stake in a bond fund. His securities portfolio is worth no more than $30,000 and as little as $2,000.

Rep. Bernie Sanders, a self-described democratic socialist who trounced millionaire Rich Tarrant in Vermont's Senate race, seems to live a spartan life, in accordance with his political beliefs. Aside from a Burlington condominium valued at $100,000 to $250,000, he had just $31,000 to $115,000 stashed in a credit union and a retirement account.

Twenty-five senators voted against the government bailout. How did yours vote? How much are they worth?

My Indiana senators - one Democrat, one Republican (both rich) voted in favor. And with this vote - as I promised when I wrote to them - they have lost any and all support from this Independent voter. I will not forget. And I will be the first to remind them of their votes when the dollar eventually collapses.

And of course... they will neither listen nor will they care. I don't belong to the club.

Senator Russ Feingold said the following:

"I will oppose the Wall Street bailout plan because though well intentioned, and certainly much improved over the administration’s original proposal, it remains deeply flawed. It fails to offset the cost of the plan, leaving taxpayers to bear the burden of serious lapses of judgment by private financial institutions, their regulators, and the enablers in Washington who paved the way for this catastrophe by removing the safeguards that had protected consumers and the economy since the great depression. The bailout legislation also fails to reform the flawed regulatory structure that permitted this crisis to arise in the first place. And it doesn’t do enough to address the root cause of the credit market collapse, namely the housing crisis. Taxpayers deserve a plan that puts their concerns ahead of those who got us into this mess."

-Senator Russ Feingold, October 1, 2008

Here is the Senate roll call from the government bailout bill:

Democrats who voted Yes

Akaka, Hawaii; Baucus, Mont.; Bayh, Ind.; Biden, Del.; Bingaman, N.M.; Boxer, Calif.; Brown, Ohio; Byrd, W.Va.; Cardin, Md.; Carper, Del.; Casey, Pa.; Clinton, N.Y.; Conrad, N.D.; Dodd, Conn.; Durbin, Ill.; Feinstein, Calif.; Harkin, Iowa; Inouye, Hawaii; Kerry, Mass.; Klobuchar, Minn.; Kohl, Wis.; Lautenberg, N.J.; Leahy, Vt.; Levin, Mich.; Lincoln, Ark.; McCaskill, Mo.; Menendez, N.J.; Mikulski, Md.; Murray, Wash.; Nelson, Neb.; Obama, Ill.; Pryor, Ark.; Reed, R.I.; Reid, Nev.; Rockefeller, W.Va.; Salazar, Colo.; Schumer, N.Y.; Webb, Va.; Whitehouse, R.I.

Democrats who voted No

Cantwell, Wash.; Dorgan, N.D.; Feingold, Wis.; Johnson, S.D.; Landrieu, La.; Nelson, Fla.; Stabenow, Mich.; Tester, Mont.; Wyden, Ore.

Democrats Not Voting

Kennedy, Mass.

Republicans voting Yes

Alexander, Tenn.; Bennett, Utah; Bond, Mo.; Burr, N.C.; Chambliss, Ga.; Coburn, Okla.; Coleman, Minn.; Collins, Maine; Corker, Tenn.; Cornyn, Texas; Craig, Idaho; Domenici, N.M.; Ensign, Nev.; Graham, S.C.; Grassley, Iowa; Gregg, N.H.; Hagel, Neb.; Hatch, Utah; Hutchison, Texas; Isakson, Ga.; Kyl, Ariz.; Lugar, Ind.; Martinez, Fla.; McCain, Ariz.; McConnell, Ky.; Murkowski, Alaska; Smith, Ore.; Snowe, Maine; Specter, Pa.; Stevens, Alaska; Sununu, N.H.; Thune, S.D.; Voinovich, Ohio; Warner, Va.

Republicans voting No

Allard, Colo.; Barrasso, Wyo.; Brownback, Kan.; Bunning, Ky.; Cochran, Miss.; Crapo, Idaho; DeMint, S.C.; Dole, N.C.; Enzi, Wyo.; Inhofe, Okla.; Roberts, Kan.; Sessions, Ala.; Shelby, Ala.; Vitter, La.; Wicker, Miss.

Others (Independent) voting Yes

Lieberman, Conn.

Others (Independent) voting No

Sanders, Vt.

Russ Feingold: Statement on Constitution Day 2008

Statement of U.S. Senator Russ Feingold On Constitution Day 2008

September 17, 2008

On this day in 1787, our founding fathers signed the Constitution, making us a nation of laws, not of men. The basic concepts of justice, liberty, and inherent human rights outlined in that founding document, are at the very foundation of our strength as a nation.

But 221 years later, the United States is facing one of the darkest chapters in its Constitutional history. The Bush Administration has treated the Constitution and rule of law with disrespect unparalleled in our nation’s history. The list of this administration’s assaults on the Constitution is breathtaking: it includes the warrantless wiretapping program, its interrogation policy and justifications for the use of torture, its extreme positions on the legal status of detainees that have been repeatedly rejected by the Supreme Court, and its refusal to recognize and cooperate with Congress' constitutional responsibility to conduct oversight. This is a shameful legacy that must be undone in the years to come.

On Constitution Day, we should also recognize that supporting the rule of law here at home can help to strengthen democratic institutions around the world that are critical to peace and stability – and, in turn, to our own national security. Right now, countries like Pakistan and Zimbabwe are grappling with their own constitutional crises. But we cannot be a credible example for nations like these if we allow our own Constitution to erode. The disparity between our words and our actions undermines our ability to defend the rights and freedoms of peoples around the world.

Our next president will face a difficult challenge. He must repair the wreckage the current administration has left, which means renouncing some of the powers the current President tried to amass as he turned a blind eye to the rule of law and separation of powers. No president will want to limit his own power. But if we are to be the nation our founders envisioned when they gathered in Philadelphia more than two centuries ago, we must work together – across party lines and at all levels of government – to protect and defend our Constitution and restore the rule of law.

Russ Feingold on restoring our Constitution

Senator Russ Feingold (D-WI) spoke yesterday in a special hearing to address how we can repair the damage done by the Bush-Cheney administration to the system of checks and balances and to our fundamental liberties as Americans.

Seems like the perfect opportunity for our presidential candidates to demonstrate their interest in change.

But as John Nichols pointed out in The Nation, neither party's presidential candidate - Obama or McCain - was there. Nor did either make any statement today acknowledging Constitution Day, and the ravages that have been inflicted on our Constitution by the current administration (Mr. Obama - my God - how many opportunities do you plan to miss?)

As a voting American citizen, I'd sure like to know... why weren't they there? This new 'Unitary Executive' that Bush and Cheney have created somehow isn't relevant to the future president?

It certainly is relevant to us.

If the national media had done its job in their seemingly endless and empty candidate debates, our current candidates' plans concerning our former system of checks and balances would be known to us.

How strange that we are facing a national election with absolutely no idea what either candidate plans to do to restore our Constitution once he assumes the nations' highest office - resplendent with all of its new kingly powers. Or perhaps we will one day have... a queen? Of course Palin didn't make a statement either (must not have been her day to speak with the media.)

Independent candidate Ralph Nader took the opportunity today to issue a video statement blasting both parties for failing to protect our constitutional rights as citizens; he even mentions our media crisis, and calls on American citizens to 'be the media ourselves.'

Constitution Subcommittee chair Senator Russ Feingold said the following at yesterday's call to action:

Tomorrow, September 17, is the 221st anniversary of the day in 1787 when 39 members of the Constitutional Convention signed the Constitution in Philadelphia. It is a sad fact as we approach that anniversary that for the past seven and a half years, and especially since 9/11, the Bush Administration has treated the Constitution and the rule of law with a disrespect never before seen in the history of this country. By now, the public can be excused for being almost numb to new revelations of government wrongdoing and overreaching. The catalogue is breathtaking, even when immensely complicated and far reaching programs and events are reduced to simple catch phrases: torture, Guantanamo, ignoring the Geneva Conventions, warrantless wiretapping, data mining, destruction of emails, U.S. Attorney firings, stonewalling of congressional oversight, abuse of the state secrets doctrine and executive privilege, secret abrogation of executive orders, signing statements. This is a shameful legacy that will haunt our country for years to come.

There can be no dispute that the rule of law is central to our democracy and our system of government. But what does ‘the rule of law' really mean? Well, as Thomas Paine said in 1776: ‘In America, the law is king.' That, of course, was a truly revolutionary concept at a time when the King, quite literally, was the law.

Over 200 years later, we still must struggle to fulfill Paine's simply stated vision. It is not always easy, nor is it something that once done need not be carefully maintained. Justice Frankfurter wrote that law:

is an enveloping and permeating habituation of behavior, reflecting the counsels of reason on the part of those entrusted with power in reconciling the pressures of conflicting interests. Once we conceive ‘the rule of law' as embracing the whole range of presuppositions on which government is conducted . . ., the relevant question is not, has it been achieved, but, is it conscientiously and systematically pursued.

The post-September 11th period is not, of course, the first time that events have caused great stress for the checks and balances of our system of government. As Berkeley law professors Daniel Farber and Anne Joseph O'Connell write in testimony submitted for this hearing: ‘The greatest constitutional crisis in our history came with the Civil War, which tested the nature of the Union, the scope of presidential power, and the extent of liberty that can survive in war time.' But as legal scholar Louis Fisher of the Library of Congress describes in his testimony, President Lincoln pursued a much different approach than our current President when he believed he needed to act in an extra-constitutional manner to save the Union. He acted openly, and sought Congress's participation and ultimately approval of his actions. According to Dr. Fisher:

[Lincoln] took actions we are all familiar with, including withdrawing funds from the Treasury without an appropriation, calling up the troops, placing a blockade on the South, and suspending the writ of habeas corpus. In ordering those actions, Lincoln never claimed to be acting legally or constitutionally and never argued that Article II somehow allowed him to do what he did. Instead, Lincoln admitted to exceeding the constitutional boundaries of his office and therefore needed the sanction of Congress.... He recognized that the superior lawmaking body was Congress, not the President.

Each era brings its own challenges to the conscientious and systematic pursuit of the rule of law. How the leaders of our government respond to those challenges at the time they occur is, of course, critical. But recognizing that leaders do not always perform perfectly, that not every President is an Abraham Lincoln, the years that follow a crisis are perhaps even more important. And soon, this Administration will be over. So the obvious question is: ‘Where do we go from here?' I believe that one of the most important things that the next President must do, whoever he may be, is take immediate and concrete steps to restore the rule of law in this country. He must make sure that the excesses of this Administration don't become so ingrained in our system that they change the very notion of what the law is.

That, of course, is much easier said than done. It's not simply a matter of a new President saying, ‘Ok, I won't do that anymore.' This President's transgressions are so deep and the damage to our system of government so extensive that a concerted effort from the executive and legislative branches will be needed. And that means the new President will, in some respects, have to go against his institutional interests.

That is why I called this hearing - to hear from legal and historical experts on how the next President should go about tackling the wreckage that this President will leave. I've asked our two panels of experts who will testify to be forward-looking - to not only review what has gone wrong in the past seven or eight years, but to address very specifically what needs to be set right starting next year and how to go about doing it.

In addition to the testimony of the witnesses here today, I solicited written testimony from advocates, law professors, historians and other experts. So far we have received nearly two dozen submissions from a host of national groups and distinguished individuals. I want to thank each and every person who made the effort to prepare testimony for this hearing. You have done the country a real service.

All of this testimony will be included in the written record of the hearing, which I plan to present to the incoming Administration. The submissions we have received so far can be seen on my website at feingold.senate.gov. I hope that many of these recommendations, along with the testimony we will hear today, will serve as a blueprint for the new President so that he can get started right away on this immense and extremely important job of restoring the rule of law.

In a video interview (sound only) Senator Feingold made basically the same statement last week:

Feingold stands up for the Constitution

I teased some of my colleagues and said we can celebrate the Constitution on July 4th and maybe when we come back you'll decide not to tear it up. -Russ Feingold on FISA

I didn't write when the House passed their unthinkable FISA capitulation to Bush and the telecoms - so unthinkable that even my own Blue Dog Congressman opposed it:

On June 20, 2008, the House voted on the FISA Amendments Act. This bill passed the House by a recorded vote of 293 - 129. I voted against this bill, as it contains provisions that would allow for retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies and allow the President to declare what is lawful and what is not. I have strong reservations against removing the checks and balances currently in our government by effectively removing the judicial branch from the decision as to whether or not the warrantless surveillance program was lawful.

- Baron Hill, in a letter to concerned constituents

I didn't write about this Constitutional horror when it passed the Senate - even as Feingold and Chris Dodd tried to block it with a filibuster.

I have come to the conclusion now, that it is really useless to write. They own us, guys.

We are now owned - lock, stock and barrel - by corporate America. The Constitution, as King George himself was purported to have said, is "just a piece of paper."

While our troops are supposedly fighting for 'freedom' and 'democracy' overseas in Iraq - and Iraqis call it an occupation - no one is defending our own freedom and democracy here at home. From tyranny.

Well, no one save a few: Kucinich, Feingold and Dodd.

Nancy Pelosi and Steny Hoyer have sold out. It appears a great majority of the Democrats in power have sold out.

They have sold out to the thousands of lobbyists now working right next to them in D.C., and with much more access and money than we will ever know. These days, representation costs money. We apparently don't have it, so we are of no consequence and the looting of our public coffers will continue - along with this war, the spying, and the corruption - unabated.

This administration's crimes are already much worse than Watergate - everybody knows it, and no one will touch it. The newspapers won't even write about it. Is that a democracy?

The Government of the People, by the People and for the People has perished from the Earth.

The only questions now before us are how the whole thing is going to cave in around us... and when?

Feingold questions Petraeus

Can we clone Senator Feingold - please?

Indiana will take two. Thank you.



UPDATE: I just found out that two of the seven soldiers who authored this New York Times op-ed "The War as We Saw It" died yesterday in a vehicle accident in Iraq. One of them, Sgt. Mora, was due to return home in November.

Several Senators, including Senator Chuck Hagel, spoke highly of the op-ed and the soldiers who wrote it during the hearings - asking who the Senate should be expected to believe, the soldiers who fought in Iraq, or Petraeus?

Meanwhile, Petraeus never mentioned that two of them had just died, the previous day.

He obviously knew about the accident... he mentions it at the end of this YouTube video.

Did he know that two of the op-ed writers died in that accident? Their obituaries had already run in their hometown newspapers (Staff Sergeant Yance Gray, Sergeant Omar Mora) by the time of the hearings. Their names were out - to the general public. How could Petraeus not know?

And imagine the embarrassment had this come out in the hearings...

The Pentagon doesn't have a very good track record of letting on that they know information that will be damaging to their case (Tillman, Lynch.) And because of this past behavior, I no longer give them the benefit of the doubt.

Petraeus will most likely have known their names IF their names were on that op-ed writers' list, because someone from below would have freaked and sent the news up through the ranks. The Pentagon PR people were undoubtedly going crazy.

Or... perhaps not. Perhaps Petraeus 'wouldn't recall' their names anyway. Perhaps such a high ranking general wouldn't care about individual names. Which is worse - that he knew and didn't say, or that he didn't know because nobody cared?

I just hope he was squirming like hell when the Senators were talking about these guys. If two out of seven guys who write an op-ed can't even get home alive... yeah, surge is going just great. Hopefully the rest will make it out of, as Senator Hagel puts it, that 'meat-grinder.'

Gotta love Russ...

This is great: from The Progressive Patriots Fund!

Russ Feingold: Update on Censure

The Senate can't impeach... but it can censure.

Over the last week, I've held Listening Sessions across Wisconsin and heard the same sort of comments that thousands of people like you have emailed my way over the last week - it's time to hold the President, and his administration, accountable. Become A Citizen Co-Sponsor of Censure The President and Vice President led our nation into an unwise war, under false pretenses, without adequate planning, and have mismanaged the situation that continues today. The President and Attorney General have time and time again thumbed their noses at the Constitution and the rule of law - on everything from warrantless wiretapping to undermining Congress' role to conduct adequate oversight. If Congress stands by and does nothing to hold this administration responsible, we open the door for this President, and future presidents, to continue to undermine the very foundation of our government whenever they see fit. The President, Vice President and Attorney General must be held accountable. Become A Citizen Co-Sponsor of Censure The President has taken our country down the wrong path for far too long and it is up to each and every one of us to get America moving back in the right direction. As I mentioned above, thousands of you have joined our effort and signed on as Citizen Co-Sponsors of Censure. By showing your support today, Congressman Hinchey - the lead sponsor of both censure resolutions in the House - and I can show our colleagues in Congress that the American people demand accountability. Sincerely, Russ Feingold United States Senator Honorary Chair, Progressive Patriots Fund

Feingold willing to stay; protect civil liberties

This is why I revere the man. This is why I wish, desperately at times, that he was my Senator. Senator Feingold is a man of true ethics, and he's representing us... at a time when so many others are either looting, spinning or caving.

While congressional Democrats are caving to the White House right before the break, so as to appear 'tough on terrorism' (and weak on defending the rights of American citizens,) Russ is standing tall. Again. Probably also alone. Again.

Commenting that congressional Democrats and Republicans are moving “awfully quickly” on a White House proposal that will make it easier for (whoever is doing it these days, no doubt outsourced to a corporation) to eavesdrop on, well everyone, Feingold said he is in “no hurry” to leave town for the August recess:

“I don’t feel the need to get out of here. I would much rather stay here than have us make a terrible mistake,” said Feingold, who has made a name for himself as a champion on civil liberties in the Senate. “This is not the kind of thing that should be done on the fly, and I am prepared to stay here as long as it takes to fix it. Or, if they need force this through, I’m not going to make it easy, if they don’t make it better.”

Thank you Russ! I don't use the word often... but you're one of my few heroes in Washington. Somewhere out there, Lincoln is smiling. Somewhere out there, our nation's founders are cheering.

(And someday when you no longer need worry about 'accepting' anything from anyone -- I'm betting Benjamin Franklin is holding a pint of beer for you!)

Senate calls for special counsel to investigate Gonzo & subpoena for Rove

Fiery end to a hot July!

From Think Progress:

Senators Call For Appointment Of Special Counsel To Investigate Gonzales For Perjury

At a news conference this afternoon, four members of the Senate Judiciary Committee called for the appointment of a special counsel to investigate Alberto Gonzales on perjury charges.

Sens. Charles Schumer, Dianne Feinstein, Russ Feingold, and Sheldon Whitehouse explained in a letter to Solicitor General Paul Clement that “it has become apparent that the Attorney General has provided at a minimum half-truths and misleading statements” to the Judiciary Committee. They wrote:

We ask that you immediately appoint an independent special counsel from outside the Department of Justice to determine whether Attorney General Gonzales may have misled Congress or perjured himself in testimony before Congress.

The Senate appears more willing to go after these lying neocons than the House; although I'm not counting Conyers out just yet. It appears both Houses are working together right now to clamp down on the unitary executive before the August recess; with both Judiciary Committees taking the lead:

"We have now reached a point where the accumulated evidence shows that political considerations factored into the unprecedented firing of at least nine United States Attorneys last year," said Leahy, the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee....

"It has become apparent that the attorney general has provided at a minimum half-truths and misleading statements," four members of the Senate Judiciary Committee wrote in a letter to Solictor General Paul Clement.

They asked Clement to immediately appoint an indepedent counsel from outside the Justice Department to determine whether Gonzales "may have misled Congress or perjured himself in testimony before Congress."

"We do not make this request lightly," wrote Sens. Charles E. Schumer of New York, Dianne Feinstein of California, Russ Feingold of Wisconsin and Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island.

Gosh, maybe they are getting annoyed with Gonzo's lies.

At a press conference this afternoon, Schumer accused Gonzales of violating his constitutional oath:

He took an oath to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Instead he tells the half truth, the partial truth, and everything but the truth. And he does it not once, not twice, but over and over and over again. His instinct is not to tell the truth, but to dissemble and deceive.

Senator Russ Feingold went as far as to call Gonzo out for perjury:

Based on what we know and the evidence about what happened in terms of the gang of eight and what he said in that sworn testimony in the committee, I believe it’s perjury.

Slant me baby; gimme that yellow news!

The AP is really slipping. Or perhaps it 'slipped' long ago. But at times it is impossible to even read AP news alerts - the bias literally shrieks off the page.

Take this recent story about Russ Feingold's push to censure Bush.

Now we all know that if any administration EVER deserved to be censured, it is this one. American citizens are growing tired. We're not too fond of crime in high places, never have been, never will be. It's in our national DNA.

And while he cannot initiate impeachment -- that process has to start with John Conyers in the House Judiciary -- Senator Russ Feingold decided to act. After being pummeled three times out here with our impeachment comments, it appears that Senator Feingold heard our cries for justice and decided to censure Bush and Cheney.

Because this is something the Senate can actually do. Well that's the plan anyway.

Now for the AP's take on this:

Washington - Liberal Democratic Sen. Russ Feingold said Sunday he wants Congress to censure President Bush for his management of the Iraq war and his "assault" against the Constitution.

Oh AP editor: how do you really feel? Nice use of quotes to show your disdain. And of course, so relevant that Senator Feingold is 'liberal', and you must immediately point this out as the obvious reason for his unreasonable attack on poor president (24% rating) Bush.

But Feingold's own party leader in the Senate showed little interest in the idea. An attempt in 2006 by Feingold to censure Bush over the warrantless spying program attracted only three co-sponsors.

Bad, bad Senator Feingold. Always making waves! See? He tried this once before! And his own party leadership is against it! Crazy, crazy Senator Feingold.

Feingold, a prominent war critic, said he soon plans to offer two censure resolutions - measures that would amount to a formal condemnation of the Republican president.

And he's also against the war! I'm sure that is related!

The first would seek to reprimand Bush for, as Feingold described it, getting the nation into war without adequate military preparation and for issuing misleading public statements.

Yes, as Russ described it, they are being cited for attacking a sovereign nation on false pretenses. That about sums it up.

The second measure would seek to censure Bush for what the Democrat called a continuous assault against the rule of law through such efforts as the warrantless surveillance program against suspected terrorists, Feingold said.

Russ Feingold is a Democrat? Gosh - thank you for reminding us once again!

And actually -- I hate to bring this up -- but the issue isn't that the Bush administration is spying on terrorists. The issue is that they are illegally and unconstitutionally spying on us.

And now for the equally biased coverage of the opposing viewpoint:

At the White House, spokesman Trey Bohn said, "We realize that Senator Feingold does not care much for the president's policies."

Ya think? Forgetting of course, that only 24% of Americans (if that) actually DO care for the president's policies.

AP, AP... such an embarrassment to journalism. This isn't just Senator Feingold 'going off on his own.' Dig a little deeper, AP guys. Did you happen to see the way we (here on Daily Kos) beat the crap out of Senator Feingold last week for not endorsing impeachment? The man tries to represent the people, and gets... this predictable media disdain.

Bohn said Bush wants to work with Feingold and other Democrats on such matters as supporting U.S. troops, improving energy choices and securing health care and tax cuts for families. "Perhaps after calls for censure and more investigations, Congress may turn to such things," Bohn said.

You see? Once again, those lousy Democrats are impeding progress!

Senator Feingold... Russ... Bush wants to work with you! You just haven't noticed with all of the endless filibusters on these very issues. But really. He does. Really. If only you wouldn't waste everyone's time with such silliness as condemning a rogue presidency, we could get back to the daily obstruction games.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said Feingold's proposals showed the nation's frustration. But Reid said he would not go along with them and said the Senate needs to focus on finishing spending bills on defense and homeland security.

Frustration? Harry, Harry... we're PISSED OFF. Get that through your head. We're outraged. We're freaking out.

And we've noticed how well your spending bills are going, yes we have. Damned well. That all-nighter resulted in real progress. I'm not blaming you for that one, just sayin. You have time... because you'll never get anywhere with this GOP filibuster-bluster, and you know it. Do something for us -- for the people. Just this once.

"We have a lot of work to do," Reid said. "The president already has the mark of the American people _ he's the worst president we ever had. I don't think we need a censure resolution in the Senate to prove that."

Oh yes, so much work to do. All of it more important than the Constitution, illegal wiretapping, lies, obstruction of justice, outing a CIA agent, more lies, more obstruction of justice, and an imperial presidency.

Senator Reid -- we don't need a censure resolution, that is true. We need impeachment.

As for the Senate's top Republican, "I think it's safe to say Russ Feingold is not a fan of George Bush. I think that's the best way to sum that up," said Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky.

Senator Feingold, you're so mean. Why don't you like the president? Don't you love America?

The 'Russ Feingold' diaries

As many people know (by now,) Senator Russ Feingold regularly posts 'diaries' out on Daily Kos.

On July 13th, he posted a diary about Democratic progress in ending the war in Iraq. His diary was immediately 'hijacked' by loud and almost endless demands, pleas, and intelligent arguments for impeachment. I don't think a single comment was really about the diary itself. Russ came out to Kos, and he was immediately jumped: he was the one representative people hoped would listen.

Within the comment section, he responded at least once; saying that he didn't believe that impeachment was a 'good use of time'; that there was much work to be done, and that impeachment would be a lengthy process.

This of course, spurred even a greater flurry of angry, frustrated comments. People discussed precedent, the rule of law, danger to democracy, the destruction of our government, the destruction of our good name around the world, and mostly the gross illegality of this administration. The comments were at times amazing, and in total very consistent.

Hundreds of people came out of the woodwork to voice their concerns.

Later in the week, Russ came back. He posted a second diary, this one specifically addressing impeachment and again reiterating his thought that it wasn't a good use of the time remaining in this congress.

While some have pointed to Republicans’ decision to impeach President Clinton, I am also concerned about the over-use of impeachment. And I am conscious of the fact that I would have a specific role to play as a sworn, impartial juror should an impeachment be tried in the Senate. If charges come to the Senate, I will approach them and the trial with the same seriousness that I had when I participated in the Clinton impeachment trial. I would not prejudge the case one way or the other should it come to this.

I fully respect the anger and frustration many Americans feel with this Administration. I share much of it. But on balance, I think Congress’s time is much better spent ending the war in Iraq, conducting the oversight that was absent for the last six years, and advancing progressive legislation.

Once again, Kos posters came right back at him about the continual filibusters and obstruction by the GOP (implying that the Democrats weren't getting much accomplished anyway.) They also reiterated the continuing damage being waged on United States citizens, detainees, Iraq, and the climate by this 'unitary' executive branch (and no, I won't capitalize unitary - it is the antipathy of all that is American, a contradiction of our precious Constitution, and as such does not deserve to be acknowledged.)

The second diary filled up with fiery impeachment comments just as the first. There are, at this point 1889 comments posted. He apparently read all of the comments, and even added an update:

UPDATE: I know that many of you disagree with my approach to this issue, but I thought it was important to make it clear where I’m coming from and explain why I am not calling for impeachment.

I certainly do believe in holding this Administration accountable and upholding the Constitution and the rule of law. That’s why last year I called for the President to be censured for his authorization of the illegal wiretapping program. I thought that was the appropriate course because it would have put the Senate on record in condemning the President’s wrongdoing. I still think that the censure resolution played an important role in focusing the public and the media’s attention on the issue. And I am working to make sure that Congress finally exercises its oversight responsibility by holding hearings and demanding information about the wiretapping program, the U.S. attorney firings and other abuses of power.

Many of you also wrote that if I recognize that the President and Vice President may have committed impeachable offenses, than it is our responsibility to impeach. As I pointed out, it is the role of the House to impeach, and it is the role of the Senate to try impeachments. But the Constitution left it up to the judgment of members of Congress whether or not moving forward with impeachment is best for the country.

Please keep the comments coming. I’ll do my best to read them all. I very much appreciate your honesty and directness. This exchange is very important to me.

Yesterday, Russ came back out to Kos again, explaining his plan to censure Bush and Cheney:

The last time I posted on Daily Kos, it certainly generated a lot of interest, even though many people disagreed with what I had to say. I read all of the comments and I know many of you disagreed with me. As always, I appreciate how honest and passionate the Daily Kos community is about the issues that matter and even when we don’t agree it was important to have the civil exchange that we did.

After that last post, you really got me thinking. While I still am not convinced that Congress should pursue impeachment, you made some great points about how important it is to hold this administration accountable for its terrible misconduct. That includes tough oversight by Congress, but we should do more than that. The history books should show that Congress formally condemned this President, and others in the administration who have so brazenly misled the American people and undercut the rule of law.

Wow, imagine that. He was listening and thinking about our responses. And he came right out and said it publicly.

At this point, everyone was attacking him (they are still attacking him today,) declaring that he has betrayed the people and that he 'doesn't understand' the desire for impeachment and the reasons for demanding it.

There are now over 1000 comments posted to yesterday's diary.

Members of the Daily Kos community may be outraged and angry with Russ. And yet... just look what he has done. We now have three Russ Feingold diaries full of impeachment fury -- diaries that will stand for all to see, that will be seen, simply because they were posted by Senator Russ Feingold.

I may be out on a limb here, but the fact that he came back... well, I have a theory.

I do believe he is on our side. He is a brilliant man - he was a Rhodes scholar and he graduated Harvard with honors (law degree) I think we are pushing it, if we think Russ doesn't 'get it.' Russ gets it.

If you look at the other yahoos and bozos who somehow managed to get elected to our government -- Russ can think circles around them. And he's a completely ethical guy... he's our wizard (to put it in Hogwarts terms.) He may in fact be a little too clever for us, in our anger and frustration.

Think about his recent diaries. They generated a firestorm of impeachment comments - very well-thought out and fiery comments. Excellent comments. What a gold mine of impeachment fury.

After the first round, he came back yet again and egged everyone on, to produce still more fiery comments. Another gold mine. Another huge repository of great and insightful impeachment comments. And then he came back again yesterday, but this time he offered something... something that he, as a Senator, can actually deliver. And he gave everyone credit for making him think. He told everyone that he was listening. What he didn't say, but that everyone should contemplate... is that due to his diaries, there are now three repositories of impeachment arguments that are impossible to refute. It is impossible now for anyone in Congress to say that 'the people' do not understand impeachment, and that they do not support it. The comments show how smart the people actually are.

Russ can't initiate the impeachment process himself (it has to start in the House,) and he will have to serve as a juror if impeachment leads to a trial in the Senate.

Russ is helping us. He's even willing to be a lightning rod for the cause. Do we really believe that other congressmen and senators somehow missed Russ Feingold's diaries - and all of the comments they generated? Please. I even emailed the links to Bruce Fein, in case they might be useful.

Everyone is watching. And they know the American people are outraged. And thanks to Fox's O'Reilly (who blasted Daily Kos on several recent broadcasts) many conservatives are now reading the site as well. And they will see these arguments, and I suspect some of them - exposed to this information for the first time - will pause and think.

All because of Russ. No one would have bothered with anyone else's diaries, but because they are Senator Russ Feingold's diaries -- everyone is paying attention.

We never lost Russ. But at some point, we might stop attacking him... and go after the House. It has to start in the House.

Russ calls for censure of Bush and Cheney

Perished from the earth

Over a hundred years ago, Abraham Lincoln gave one of the most stirring speeches in American history:

Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent, a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.

Surely the American Civil War as a time of much greater fear and terror than anything we have ever known in our sheltered, spoiled lifetimes.

And yet President Lincoln never demanded that the people BE AFRAID, never cut Congress out of the loop. He created a bipartisan cabinet of brilliant minds to guarantee that the best interests of the nation would be upheld, even at the cost of his own personal comfort (many of them hated him, and openly looked down on him because of his humble background.)

This was no rich men's pawn. This was a president. This man was one of us; and he believed in us.



Lincoln suspended habeas corpus when riots broke out in cities all across the North, and threatened the safety of the masses. (We citizens have never really liked our wars... have we?) And Lincoln later lifted it. We will find out today if our Senate thinks the current suspension of habeas corpus is worth lifting... without a single American city in flames, or even one lawless riot rampaging through our streets. Yes, we will see.

Lincoln was trying to save our nation... not destroy it for his own, personal gain. Lincoln believed in the dream of our nation's founders.

Democracy. Liberty. Justice.

Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure.

Yes, wars will do that. Quite a lot of 'testing' goes on during wartime. 58,168 Americans died in the Vietnam war. 54,246 Americans died in Korea. 407,316 Americans died in WWII. 116,708 Americans died in WWI.

558,052 Americans died in the American Civil War, in the course of only 4 years... out of a total national population of about 30 million (today we have a population of 300 million.) Imagine the impact on society, on towns, cities and farms all across America. And imagine... they didn't toss out the Constitution - and Lincoln still conferred with Congress before going to war.



The South fought to form their own, new Constitution; the Union fought to defend the current. Each side was, in their way, fighting for their vision of America... just as today, angry voices on the right and angry voices on the left all fight for their own vision, their own American reality.

We disagree on everything else, but we all do love our country.

Unfortunately for us, corporations do not love our country. They want to rule our country. They want ever more money, ever more power, ever more control. But no, they do not love anything... but money.

I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. Already they have raised up a monied aristocracy that has set the government at defiance. - Thomas Jefferson

Commercial shackles are generally unjust, oppressive, and impolitic. - James Madison

We were warned. We have been warned by everyone; from Jefferson to Eisenhower. We didn't listen. We were lured by trinkets and toys, and capitalism grew and grew, until at last it ate democracy.

But back to Gettysburg. Back to the battlefield.

We are met on a great battle-field of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this.

But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate -- we can not consecrate -- we can not hallow -- this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here.

We are engaged, once again, in a war. But this war was never about freedom. This war was never about ideals; although the money powers spun it a way that would inspire yet another generation of idealistic, patriotic warriors to fight.

This war has always been about money.



We are daily met on a battlefield of a war. We just haven't yet awakened as a nation to the true nature of our war; and exactly who it is that has declared war on us.

We are misled, co-opted, enslaved... more and more, every day. Our freedom is being stolen from us at every turn by the money powers that lurk in the shadows; the powers that pay for our politicians, own our media, and call the shots. The money that wields the real power behind the scenes in Congress.

Do we think -- do we really think, for one moment, that anything we see is happening without their consent?

It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced.

And how do we do that exactly? How do we end this 'perpetual war' that was declared against our will? This war... this endless war that will kill generation after generation of American and 'enemy' warriors alike, along with untold millions of innocent civilians...while destroying our very democracy in the process?

How do we resist this 'war beast' that is intent on killing us?

It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us -- that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion -- that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain -- that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom -- and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.

Ah, father Abraham... that is the crux of the matter. That is the heart of everything. Because you see, we no longer are a government 'of the people, by the people, and for the people.' That government has indeed, as you once feared, perished from this earth. It happened in increments. It happened with a bill here, an amendment there, and many, many signing statements. It happened while we went to work, went to school, eat, watched TV and slept. It happened quietly and in back rooms.

All across this country, people are demanding justice, demanding the removal of this lawless presidency. For some reason, the Democrats - who we elected to 'make it right' and save our democracy - refuse to act. Most of them refuse to even listen to the voices of the people.

Even Senator Feingold who I have held in the very highest esteem and never once doubted - not for a moment - seems to believe that impeachment is not worth the time.

How can saving our Constitution and our balance of power in government, not to mention our own voice - the voice of the people - how can this not be worth the time?

Lincoln would have thought it worth the time.



Yesterday, Senator Feingold posted a diary on Daily Kos. He responded to the many angry impeachment comments that completely flooded his last diary on Kos. He restated that he feels that impeachment is not a good use of time.

I fully respect the anger and frustration many Americans feel with this Administration. I share much of it. But on balance, I think Congress’s time is much better spent ending the war in Iraq, conducting the oversight that was absent for the last six years, and advancing progressive legislation.

When I try to contact anyone about impeachment (congressman or senator,) I hear much the same... only unlike Senator Feingold, (who did approach us in good faith and is listening,) they speak to me as if talking to a small, confused child. It is as though I must be some left-wing radical to even broach the subject of impeachment. I have to tell them that I actually LEFT THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY OVER THIS before they stop and listen.

I will never belong to any party, ever again. I have lost all faith in parties. Party before nation? NEVER. I put the onus on the Democrats to restore that faith by doing something - anything - to save my country from slipping into a fascist dictatorship.

And perhaps the Democrats are satisfied to have a Democratic dictator rather than a Republican. Perhaps that is the deal that was brokered behind our backs. As long as the uniform is blue instead of red... and the right party 'wins.'



NO.

This was a government built on the rights and the voice of the people; and no one gives a damn about us anymore except when we're actually voting, excepting of course that our elections are now broken too.

And do you know why that is? Because lobbyists now outnumber lawmakers 24-1.

Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny. - Thomas Jefferson

Why would Congress give a damn about us? We don't pay their way... the corporations do. Perhaps the money powers who own the candidates and the media (except for a couple of mavericks - the ones who are ignored by the media by some strange coincidence;) perhaps these king makers told the Democratic party that they will not receive any endorsements - any money - for next year's election if they push through with impeachment.

Has anyone considered this?

These corporations are growing fat on the Bush Administration's policies, on this contractors' war, on land giveaways, cutbacks on corporate oversight, plundering of the environment, union-bashing, corporate tax cuts... this is pig trough heaven for the corporate world. In fact, corporate lobby representatives now oversee every single oversight agency; and corporations now make the rules and 'police themselves.'



And that is why I now believe that we will never, ever get this back; this government of the people. The whole thing has already gone too far under Bush and Cheney; the corporations will never give up all of this power now. And no one in Congress (other than Dennis and a handful of others) has the courage to stand against them.

One of the starkest Lincoln quotes I've ever seen was written in a letter to an officer during the Civil War. Some people have insisted Lincoln didn't write it, but a historian tracked it down and verified. I was floored when I saw it. How could he have... forseen this? But since that day, I have read many other warnings, going all the way back to our founding fathers. This danger has been looming since the very beginning of our nation.

I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country. Corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until all wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed. - Abraham Lincoln

If even Senator Feingold says 'do nothing,' it must be because he cannot see any way that Democrats can win next year without keeping impeachment off the table. And what on earth... would make a man like Senator Feingold, who so obviously loves the Constitution and agrees that these tyrants deserve to be impeached; what would make him suggest that impeachment was a bad use of time?



Perhaps the threat of continuing, lawless Neocon rule.

The sad thing... is that if this is true, and it is all about campaign finance: the Democrats are being played.

The corporations will never allow the Democrats to take over Congress or the White House unless they agree to keep things just as they are now. The corporate world will never give up a single tool in their presidential toolbox. I had nothing at all against Hillary; nothing at all... until she became lost in Rupert Murdoch's shadow. And of course Citigroup and Goldman Sachs. And Times Warner. Why would Hillary concern herself with listening to me? I will never have that kind of money.

But I still doubt that they really want Hillary; they'd much rather have a greedy Neocon like Fred Thompson.

I'm imagining a different scenario. I expect they will tell the Democrats to toe that line just a little too long... until the people become increasingly enraged and disaffected.

Then they will toss the people an independent candidate to split the weakened, Democratic vote. And of course, the gravy train will go right on, as if nothing ever happened. Giuliani or Fred Thompson. Probably Thompson because he was a lobbyist. Who better for the new corpocracy?

I hope we shall crush in its birth the aristocracy of our monied corporations which dare already to challenge our government to a trial by strength, and bid defiance to the laws of our country. - Thomas Jefferson

Do I sound cynical? Machiavelli called this hundreds of years ago. Jefferson foresaw it during the birth pangs of our nation. Adams predicted that our fledgling democracy could not survive, but would eventually 'commit suicide.'

It must have leapt while we weren't looking.

If we've lost Senator Feingold, we've lost our Democratic Congress. And they were all we have to represent us in these dark, dark days.

We have no Lincoln... except the one with the tired, sad eyes, staring out from the dusty, faded pictures of our past. The man, the president of the people; who saw the future, and is perhaps still trying to warn us across time and space.

The dogmas of the quiet past, are inadequate to the stormy present. The occasion is piled high with difficulty, and we must rise -- with the occasion. As our case is new, so we must think anew, and act anew. We must disenthrall ourselves, and then we shall save our country. - Abraham Lincoln

Senator Feingold deluged with demands for Impeachment

Yesterday, an amazing watermark was reached on Daily Kos.

Senator Russ Feingold (highly respected and an occasional blogger on Kos) posted a diary updating his efforts to end the war in Iraq. This in and of itself was not unusual. The comments (responses from the Daily Kos community) were unprecedented.

With only one or two exceptions (including Feingold's own comments) nearly every single response to his diary was an entreaty, demand or request for the impeachment of Dick Cheney and/or George Bush.

At one point Feingold responded to the impeachment avalanche by commenting:

As many of you have pointed out, articles of impeachment originate in the House, not the Senate. While I agree that the President has committed offenses right in the strike zone of impeachment (most notably with his illegal warrantless wiretapping program) and I share the outrage of many Americans at this President’s conduct, I am not sure multiple impeachment trials would be best for the country.

This comment did nothing at all to stop the flow of impeachment requests, but seemed to add fuel the fire. There are over 340 comments posted to the diary, and it is difficult to find any that aren't impassioned cries for impeachment. The arguments are intelligent, heartfelt and compelling. Take a look... and sit back and ponder.

There have been discussions about impeachment on Kos for months. Some argued pro, some con. There were reasonable and valid arguments made to support each point of view. In the last few weeks, and especially the last week, this has changed.

One by one, the opposition hardliners have had second thoughts. First the Libby 'get out of jail free' card. Then the refusal of the White House to turn over evidence. Then the refusal of the White House to allow Harriet Miers to appear before the Senate. Add to this the outrage over the Washington Post series on Cheney, news of the CIA 'Family Jewels,' and FBI abuses of the Patriot Act.

We have reached a pivotal moment, at least on Kos; in once voice, one collective scream, we are demanding that our government be rescued, the 'unitary executive' overturned, and our constitutional rule restored. And heaven help the congressman or senator who posts to the site these days, because he or she will be buried in impeachment demands. Democracy it seems is far from dead, and the people are determined to revive it to full strength.

In the end... we are American first. We want our country back.

Feingold grills Gonzales