http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x3364893Oh my.
The primitives are getting out the torches and pitchforks for an obscure senator from Wisconsin now.
Freddie Stubbs (1000+ posts) Mon Jun-23-08 10:19 PM
Original message
Feingold won't try to stop spy bill vote
Source: Green Bay Press Gazette
WASHINGTON - Wisconsin Sen. Russ Feingold will not filibuster a compromise version of an electronic surveillance program although he thinks it will infringe on U.S. citizens' civil liberties.
Advertisement
Feingold said he and other Senate opponents won't try to stop the vote, but they "won't allow it to pass quickly."
Instead, Feingold, D-Wis., told an audience at the New America Foundation that he plans to highlight the bill's flaws in floor speeches. There may be several procedural votes before final passage, he added. Feingold said he and Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., met with Senate leader Harry Reid last week to discuss their objections.
Feingold made his comments today in a question-and-answer session that followed his address on gaps in U.S. intelligence collection.
Read more: http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080623/GPG0101/80623141/1978/GPGnews
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Mon Jun-23-08 10:23 PM
Response to Original message
1. I wonder why? He's been so vocal, and nothing?
app_farmer_rb Donating Member (506 posts) Mon Jun-23-08 10:32 PM
Response to Original message
2. oooh! speeches and procedural votes!1!111!
I am so inspired by this valiant resistance to impending fascism...
Good thing Dem's are still keeping their powder dry.
Mojambo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Mon Jun-23-08 10:34 PM
Response to Original message
3. Slow it down. What the **** good does that do us?
He admits it infringes on our civili liberties but he won't use the tools he has available to stop it.
What the **** good are you then, Senator?
What the hell does Harry Reid have against filibustering anyway?
Freddie Stubbs (1000+ posts) Mon Jun-23-08 10:37 PM
Response to Reply #3
7. Perhaps they simply don't have the 41 voted necessary for a filibuster
Atman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Mon Jun-23-08 10:36 PM
Response to Original message
4. That's our man! Speeches and procedural moves! Maybe he'll hold his breath, too!
Or, gosh, Russ...MAYBE YOU COULD ****ING DO SOMETHING!
Yeah...right.
Tutonic (155 posts) Tue Jun-24-08 12:00 AM
Response to Reply #4
18. Great idea! I'd like to seem him hold his breath for a while.
And maybe he can get Harry to read the speech that he (Harry) edited for Russ.
villager Donating Member (1000+ posts) Mon Jun-23-08 10:36 PM
Response to Original message
5. And Feingold is supposed to be one of the best we've got? Disgusting, the lot of them.
atreides1 (1000+ posts) Mon Jun-23-08 10:37 PM
Response to Original message
6. To paraphrase Caesar on the Ides
Et Tu Russ?
Oceansaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Mon Jun-23-08 10:47 PM
Response to Original message
8. perhaps they spied on him too and got the 'goods' on him....whodathunkit.....
higher class Donating Member (1000+ posts) Mon Jun-23-08 11:06 PM
Response to Original message
9. If Feingold won't/can't do anything, something is very, very wrong.
I think the prisons are coming. Not tomorrow. But coming.
We have to come up with a new name for caving. I'm not saying he caved, I can't.
But something very sick and devestating is going on.
I am beginning to also despise the word bargaining. There are no bargains when our most precious possessions are tossed out.
Hmmmm. I thought the prisons were already here, but we don't know about them.
stillcool47 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Mon Jun-23-08 11:18 PM
Response to Reply #9
13. yeah really...
I don't get it. I could understand the more conservative Democratic members..of which there are plenty..coming out to say they were voting for this..but to have Russ Feingold for God's sake..surely he does not have to vote for this. I would think it could easily pass without his support.
elocs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Mon Jun-23-08 11:06 PM
Response to Original message
10. As I recall, Feingold was the one and only vote against the original Patriot Act.
Where were the rest of the Senators then?
So he's not jumping through the DU hoops the way everybody seems to think he should. Maybe he should just stop thinking for himself and simply make his decisions based upon a DU poll? Isn't this the place where any Democratic representative, great or small, will get flamed for not toeing the DU line? The sole repository of what is constitutionally good, and noble and pure.
If you ain't got Feingold, lots of luck. Let the weeping and gnashing of teeth begin as our Constitution get declared null and void here as well as the country. Nope, nothing at DU is ever over the top.
tekisui Donating Member (1000+ posts) Mon Jun-23-08 11:14 PM
Response to Original message
11. Damn, things look pretty hopeless.
The Dems are running scared.
The majority party running scared? What kind of shit is that?
MasonJar (1000+ posts) Mon Jun-23-08 11:15 PM
Response to Original message
12. No one is judging Feingold; he is indeed the top. There is something very strange coming down here. Reid needs to go along with Pelosi. He is useless.
Freddie Stubbs (1000+ posts) Tue Jun-24-08 07:13 AM
Response to Reply #12
30. Perhaps it is simply the lack of 41 votes willing to filibuster
Feingold can yell and scream and stomp his feet, but at the end of the day this thing will pass if 60 Senators do not want a filibuster.
Larkspur Donating Member (1000+ posts) Mon Jun-23-08 11:29 PM
Response to Original message
14. I wonder if one of the civil lawsuit lawyers will challenge the Constitutionality of this bill?
All it takes is 1 lawyer to try.
global1 (1000+ posts) Mon Jun-23-08 11:33 PM
Response to Reply #14
15. That Was Exactly My Thought - Maybe They Know That Something In The Bill Is unconstitutional and that even if it passes it will be junked by the courts.
Jakes Progress (434 posts) Mon Jun-23-08 11:43 PM
Response to Reply #15
16. You mean the SC that is two seats more conservative than the one that enthroned george? Not likely.
Jakes Progress (434 posts) Mon Jun-23-08 11:51 PM
Response to Original message
17. Here in our town we had a dreadful school superintendent. He had the school board buffaloed. One woman ran on a platform of getting rid of the jerk. She was very vocal for the first year, telling the newspaper what was going on, making speeches, and holding up bad policies. As her term went on she got tired of being ostracized by the rest of the board. The walked out to get something to eat when she spoke. No one seconded her motions. She began going along to try to get some support. Then she ended up thinking that she could cooperate with a few so that they would support her. Never happened. Eventually she didn't run for reelection and dropped off. The supt. eventually retired with several hundred thousand a year for life after bankrupting the district and ruining its education program.
Sorry for the tale. Just wonder if Russ is getting tired of getting the shit end of the stick for everything and being made to sit at a table in the Senate dining room by himself.
I have no respect for our Senators, Democratic or republican (and especially not for the asshole Lieberman who is neither, but a curious abomination mixture of the two.)
bertman (84 posts) Tue Jun-24-08 12:01 AM
Response to Original message
19. I hate to say this, but I'm starting to admire that old son-of-a-bitch Jesse Helms.
He was a sorry-ass racist but he never let an opportunity pass to filibuster when he found a cause he detested. And it didn't matter who screamed, yelled or tried to use procedural means to end it.
I think the game in the Senate is somewhat different now. STILL, SOME BRAVE SENATOR SHOULD AT LEAST STAND UP AND TRY TO FILIBUSTER THIS THING.
GODDAM YOU HARRY REID AND NANCY PELOSI!! YOU ARE DESPICABLE EXCUSES FOR HUMAN BEINGS.
pattmarty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Tue Jun-24-08 12:09 AM
Response to Original message
20. What about Bernie Sanders??????
Jr. from Vermont's at the nursing home, getting his daily dose of pablum and indignant outrage.
L. Coyote (1000+ posts) Tue Jun-24-08 12:18 AM
Response to Original message
21. Did someone in Germany say, "We don't have the 41 votes to stop the ovens?"
Whatever happened to the U. S. Constitution and political principles?
Where will a line finally be drawn? Murdering innocents by torture, spying on the whole nation...... illegally.
How many murders does it take before someone tries to stop these criminals?
skyounkin Donating Member (226 posts) Tue Jun-24-08 12:19 AM
Response to Original message
22. **** they are worthless- the lot of them.
raystorm7 (539 posts) Tue Jun-24-08 12:23 AM
Response to Original message
23. Practically puts all his past tough talk in the shitter if he won't even face this one on his own
11cents Donating Member (1000+ posts) Tue Jun-24-08 12:39 AM
Response to Reply #23
24. Does he have the 41 votes of not?
If he doesn't, he can't start a filibuster. Simple as that, no matter how much we try to outdo each other in over-the-top abusive language.
I think he doesn't have the 41 votes. That's why it was so maddening when Obama said that he'd "try" to stop the immunity provision; he knew they didn't have the votes to do that either and it was just ass-covering verbiage. Feh.
bamalib Donating Member (1000+ posts) Tue Jun-24-08 01:05 AM
Response to Reply #24
25. You are dead wrong
All it takes in the Senate is one person to filibuster. The 41 votes are needed to prevent a closure vote on the bill. Wayne Morse, Senator from Oregon filibustered many military bills in the Senate during the Vietnam War all by himself.
Uh-uh.
Beginning in 1964, Wayne Morse obstructed all attempts to keep South Vietnam free.
In the elections of 1968, during the height of the "anti-war" sentiment, Wayne Morse lost his seat.....to a Republican more agreeable to helping keep South Vietnam free.
11cents Donating Member (1000+ posts) Tue Jun-24-08 01:22 AM
Response to Reply #25
26. And a cloture vote ends the filibuster, yes?
How many bills did Morse actually prevent from passing?
Well, the once-senator from Oregon didn't prevent them from passing, but he managed to delay them long enough that many Americans and South Vietnamese needlessly died, while waiting.
The guy has a lot of blood on his hands, Wayne Morse.
11cents Donating Member (1000+ posts) Tue Jun-24-08 01:23 AM
Response to Reply #26
27. If your point is that Feingold should mount a symbolic filibuster in any case...
...then I agree. But my reference to 41 votes specifically had to do with cloture.
iconicgnom (446 posts) Tue Jun-24-08 02:22 AM
Response to Original message
28. they "won't allow it to pass quickly." I guess, kinda like a "secret fart".
And that's the very best the Dems can do?
Oh yah, over in C&L I see that Waxman is once again outraged by, haha, Bush once again citing executive privilege to block his, heh, "investigations". Waxman's outraged, I say! But, y'know, impeachment just isn't on the table... so... hehehe. He's outraged!
guyton (38 posts) Tue Jun-24-08 03:03 AM
Response to Original message
29. Vichy Democrats
Isn't giving despots a green-light for further abuses enough to remove Pelosi?
collaborators.
"Vichy Democrats"--I love it, but not for the same reason the gluttonous primitive does.
