Russ Feingold

It's almost like doing the right thing isn't actually hard.

This blog has essentially been dormant since the last round of FISA. Speaking only for myself, what went down in February was one of the most demoralizing moments in my political life. I've been out of the picture in large part because the complete and total abdication of leadership by the Democratic Senate caucus, with rare exceptions, left me feeling that the party simply was incapable of functioning at all in line with the interests of the base or even the country. If they were not there for me, if they would not listen to the concerns of tens of thousands of patriotic Americans, if that willful ignorance of what the public was asking of them was to continue to manifest itself in vote after shameful vote, what use would there be in me spending my time and energies trying to make them behave like the leaders that their PACs and fundraising emails make them out to be?

Mssrs. Young and Paine continued to post during the House FISA fight in March, but I can only imagine that they have shared the same feelings of alienation as I.

Proving that it is truly a herpes upon the 110th Congress, FISA is back. Again. With more puss-filled cowardice and contagious fear than ever before.

And again FISA reveals the dank seams of the Democratic Party. The outrages are too many to tally, but I feel I must start at the top -- our party's new leadership: Barack Obama. Earlier this week we learned that Mr. Obama, who had previously pledged to support a filibuster of legislation with retroactive immunity, now thought national security was the unquestionable trump card over the rule of law.

"The bill has changed. So I don't think the security threats have changed, I think the security threats are similar. My view on FISA has always been that the issue of the phone companies per se is not one that overrides the security interests of the American people."

It doesn't surprise me that Obama is putting politics ahead of his word. Clearly he is marching in the footsteps of every other Democratic presidential nominee in modern memory when it comes to general election policies. Democrats, you see, can only win by convincing Republican base voters to vote for them. Hence, Obama must now act like a centrist, or, better yet, a Republican. And what do Republicans do? Fuck the Constitution to scare people into voting for them. Naturally that's what Obama does (can you smell the change being disbelieved by OFBs nationwide?).

But the Bob Shrum-style assfucking of the base wouldn't be complete without the left edge being covered. Stepping bravely into the breach on behalf of Mr. Obama are Party Elders Harry Reid and Chuck Schumer, who both proclaimed their newly discovered, patchouli-doused, Dirty Fucking Hippie credentials by both rushing to oppose the FISA legislation in full, a position neither man had taken in any previous legislative fights. The result? Obama now has the Democratic "leadership" firmly on his left-flank.

And Lo! He is now a centrist! Let he bathe in the glory that Rush Limbaugh's radio audience shall bestow upon him as he is seen as the third coming of Ronald "I Just Made Russia Illegal, Bitches" Reagan.

Or not. Because that won't happen and only ends up pleasing world-renowned throb wankers like Dan Gerstein. In fairness to Mr. Gerstein, though, everything I have ever learned about politics in America tells me that he is a far more important person to please than the Democratic base as far as the Democratic Party elites are concerned. It's not Gerstein's fault that some Important people are politically clueless enough to think that he's right when he opens his mouth.

Moving on...

It's just been announced that FISA will wait until July 8th, after a pleasant vacation cools tempers and gives our Senators more time to not read the critically important legislation in front of them. What should we expect when the fight resumes next month? More losses. Brutal, craven, embarrassing, disheartening losses. Out of 100 voices in the Senate, there are but two real bright spots: Chris Dodd and Russ Feingold.

This week Dodd delivered what I think easily ranks as one of, if not the, most eloquent and important speeches of the Bush era. There are few things that were left unsaid when it came to assessing how evil and unAmerican the pending FISA legislation is. There were even fewer things left unsaid by Dodd, speaking for over two hours late in the night from the Senate floor, about the abuses perpetrated by this administration, approved explicitly or tacitly by this Congress. Dodd was the voice calling out with utter clarity, "Do not go that way, for I can still see and you are blind." Sadly, his colleagues do not have the most basic survival instincts that would impel them to heed Dodd's words. And so they continue to walk towards the cliff that represents the end of America and the start of a horrible tyranny only previously envisioned in the dark thoughts of McCarthy, Nixon, and Kit Bond.

Standing by Dodd's side, again, is Russ Feingold (a man who if there was any justice in politics would be on his way to accepting the Democratic nomination for presidency in Denver this August). While Dodd's words have focused on right and wrong, legislation and Constitution, Feingold has been the whip on his colleagues. He has offered unflinching criticism of those Democrats who cower in the face of Rovian attack ads. And he has voiced his complete and utter disdain for them, in terms that I cannot recall any other Democratic senator ever using. In a radio appearance on The Young Turks Feingold said:

...Ben Mankiewicz: Alright, well, Senator Feingold, without naming names, and I understand you don't want to single out any of your colleagues, what is the overall reasoning, do you think, what is going on with some of these Democrats who might surprise us? I mean, they're not stupid. Well...not all of them anyway. Why are they buying into a notion of a compromise when there really is no giving on the other side?

Senator Russ Feingold: It's the latest chapter of running for cover when the Administration tries to intimidate Democrats on national security issues. It's the most embarrassing failure of the Democrats I've seen since 2006, other than the failure to vote to end the Iraq War. These are the two real sad aspects of an otherwise pretty good record. It's letting George Bush and Dick Cheney have their way even though they're that unpopular and on their way out. It's really incredible.

Cenk Uygur: It is incredible. So, I mean, it leads to the question that everybody's been asking. You know, whether it's our viewers, the readers of the blogs, etc. the actual bloggers, everybody that's paying attention is asking: Why are the Democrats doing it? You know, I got three possibilities. One is caving. They think, "Hey if we give into Bush, we're going to win more elections, and we don't really care about the policy, and the fourth amendment in the constitution are an interesting side note, but I want to win more elections." Number two is, they're scared of their own shadow and they didn't get the memo that the Republicans are grossly unpopular throughout the country, and that President Bush is the most unpopular President in the history of the United States. But if they didn't get that memo, you got to question a couple of different things about their judgment. The third theory out there is that they're complacent that people like Rockefeller signed off on some of these abuses and they get money from the lobbyists. So they don't really want to rock the boat.

Senator Russ Feingold: Well my honest belief is that it's the first two. I don't really see it as having to do with political contributions. I don't see it that they really want to cooperate with this stuff. I see it more as the first two things you said. Having to do with political fear, and, you know, calculations about elections to be honest with you. There are many areas that I think are grossly effected by money. I think it is less true of this, and it has more to do with political fear.

In other words, Lead or Get Out Of the Way says Senator Feingold.

We'll see what the butcher's bill looks like next month after the Senate Democratic caucus gives George W. Bush and Dick Cheney everything they wanted and more. My guess is that no matter what Americans do between now and July 8th, the fix is in. Donate to anyone other than Chris Dodd and Russ Feingold at your own peril. Better yet, give to Accountability Now and try to get better people in office who will lead alongside Dodd and Feingold.

I'm too enraged to write anything thought provoking or witty. The leadership of the Democratic party is a bunch of spineless, cowardly, weak, feckless, cowardly asshats, who all need to be primaried until they die. When they retire from the Senate, we need to primary their retirements. When they die and go to Purgatory (they are too milquetoast, feckless, traitorous and weak to justify their special place in hell, and they sure as shit aren't getting into heaven), I want to primary them there too. Make their lives miserable for all eternity. Seriously, this is beyond pathetic.

How many people failed? The little field where I select who is in the way on my blog form ran out of room before I could add everyone. That's how spectacularly our leadership has failed.

The only thing left to do on this issue is sign the petition over at FDL and pray that the house actually stands up and leads. Of course, that will happen when I start shooting my writing quills out of my nipples, but whatever.

Matt Browner Hamlin has all the gory details on todays spectacular failure of leadership. May God have mercy on their souls.

I should add that Feingold and Dodd were the only ones to rise up and take a stand on this issue in any significant way. (Obama voted the right direction, but never brought it the attention it deserved, which in his position as a candidate he had the ability to really do.) So kudos to them for behaving like Senators instead of little scared children.

Yesterday, when the Democratic Senators rose to speak on behalf of their amendments it was clear which of the speakers were men and which were clowns mice.

Chuck Schumer took his 10 minutes, asked that it be increased to 12 minutes because he had so much to say. This was interesting, we thought, maybe he's catching some of the passion that millions of Americans are trying to imbue into the Democratic caucus. Defending the Constitution, rejecting a criminal Administration, restoring checks and balances, protecting the rule of law, yes, this is something to feel passionate about!

Schumer then said that if he doesn't need all 12 minutes, then roll minutes over to his colleague. Whatever, get to it! And then, Schumer, on his feet in the middle of a debate over Bush's perversion of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, introduced a resolution to praise a football team. He used over half of his time talking about sports. This Equals Clown.

Conversely, here is what Russ Feingold said of the issue:

How has the debate overall come to be framed so incorrectly, as you suggest?
One reason is that there’s been an inadequate response to the Bush-Cheney scare tactics. They’ve been successful every time—in the Iraq War, with the Patriot Act—[in saying] “If we’re not given these powers immediately, we will be attacked.” These are bogus claims. The problem is with many people, including Democrats, who fail to stand up and say, “We feel just as strongly as you do. And we don’t want you invading our privacy without any court review.”
Supporters of the PAA say that if these calls and e-mails were subject to the regular FISA court, it would take hundreds of lawyer and analyst hours to prepare them for the appropriate review.
Listen, a criticism like that just shows no understanding of what’s going on here. Every time a foreign conversation runs through a transmitter in L.A., there was an archaic technicality in the law that would require individualized warrants [in order for the government to intercept them]. We all said, fine, we agree with changing that, but in cases when the program ends up impacting Americans, there has to be some oversight.
What’s the status of your amendments? It’s been suggested that in the consent agreement to allow debate, Republicans are allowing straight majority votes only on amendments they know will fail—including yours.
We’re trying to make a record here, and to show who voted for what. My prediction is this thing will go through; it will be challenged and go through the courts. And eventually a Supreme Court with something like seven Republican-appointed judges will strike down the worst parts of it. This is a long-term battle to protect the rights of the American people.
In the modern political climate you’re more likely to hear about amnesty with respect to undocumented workers than you are about the amnesty for the phone and Internet companies who helped the government break the law before the act was passed.
Oh, I think there’s tremendous feeling that there’s a problem here. In some ways I think it goes deeper than immigration. People see their own personal liberties affected. And we’ve seen that the telecom immunity does offend people. People may be nervous about giving a free pass [on immigration]. But what’s gonna bother them even more are the types of things I’m describing here: the level to which their privacy is being subjected to a “trust me” government that impacts their daily freedom and privacy. It really is disturbing to people with any kind of common sense at all.
from Newsweek, via the CREDOblog

Feingold: The problem is with many people, including Democrats, who fail to stand up and say, “We feel just as strongly as you do. And we don’t want you invading our privacy without any court review.”

Yes. Those people are the problem.

NOBODY thinks that the problem with Schumer is that he fails to stand up and say that the New York Giants won a game, hip hip hooray. Give me G. Give me an I. Give me a A. ...No.

Give me a real Senator.

A group of senators, led by Russ Feingold is urging Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to make the FISA bill passed by the Senate Judiciary Committee (SJC) the base bill to be considered on the Senate floor. And they're doing it publicly.

“The Judiciary Committee FISA bill fixes many of the flaws of the surveillance law we enacted in August and the new bill approved by the Intelligence Committee. Everyone agrees that we should give our intelligence officials the tools they need to go after suspected terrorists. There’s no reason we can’t do that while still protecting the privacy of innocent Americans and ensuring adequate oversight of these broad new surveillance authorities -- and without setting the dangerous precedent of granting retroactive immunity to companies that allegedly participated in an unlawful program,” Senator Feingold said.

“I strongly urge the Majority Leader to take up the Judiciary Committee’s version of the FISA legislation. It is absolutely essential that as the Senate begins debating reforms to FISA we do not include retroactive immunity provisions for telecommunications companies that may have engaged in illegal conduct. Additionally, the Judiciary Committee’s version of the FISA legislation contains much stronger safeguards which will serve to protect Americans against the President’s warantless wiretapping program,” Senator Dodd said.

The Senators expressing their support for the SJC FISA bill in a letter to Senate Majority Leader Reid are Senators Russ Feingold (D-WI), Chris Dodd (D-CT), Barack Obama (D-IL), Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Robert Menendez (D-NJ), Joe Biden (D-DE), Sherrod Brown (D-OH), Tom Harkin (D-IA), Ben Cardin (D-MD), Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY), Daniel Akaka (D-HI), Jim Webb (D-VA), Ted Kennedy (D-MA), and Barbara Boxer (D-CA).

Much of the freedom loving left spent the last weeks freaking out about California's God-awful shame-factory Senator Dianne Feinstein and her loathsome whoring for evil telecommunications companies. The issue was whether these 'comic book evil' multi-national corporations should be granted retroactive immunity for aiding and abetting George Bush's illegal domestic spying operation.

Pulling a page from Bobby Kennedy's book of awesome, Wisconsin's superhero-tastic Senator Russ Feingold punched the wall and screamed "Fuck That!"

This is the headline of his Press Release:  FEINGOLD AMENDMENT WOULD STRIKE RETROACTIVE IMMUNITY FOR TELECOMS.  Nice.  He's pushing an amendment to the FISA Legislation currently before Senate Judiciary Committee which would allow courts to rule on warrantless wiretapping:

“Granting retroactive immunity for companies that allegedly went along with this illegal program is unjustified and undermines the rule of law. Not only would retroactive immunity set the terrible precedent that breaking the law is permissible and companies need not worry about the privacy of their customers, but it would likely prevent courts from ruling on the President’s illegal warrantless wiretapping program. This program was one of the worst abuses of executive power in our history, and the courts should be able to rule on it once and for all.”

Glenn Greenwald first made the Kennedy connection:

The very idea of "retroactive immunity" for lawbreaking corporations is so radical, so repugnant to the most basic principles of the "rule of law," that only one prior attempt can be found in recent history (at least from my research): the efforts by some in Congress in 1965 to enact a law retroactively legalizing the mergers by six large banks which clearly -- as a federal court found -- were illegal under our nation's antitrust laws.

The banks knew they were violating anti-trust laws when they merged but they did it anyway. And when courts began ruling that their behavior was illegal, they ran crying to Congress that a law be passed granting them amnesty, claiming that they'd poop their diapers and that the consequences would be ruinous if they were held accountable under the law.

But the very concept of retroactive amnesty -- the idea that corporations could break the law and then have their bought-and-paid-for Congress pass a special law legalizing their lawbreaking -- was so profoundly offensive to Sen. Robert Kennedy (who had been the Attorney General when the banks broke the law), as well as then-Attorney General Nicholas Katzenbach, that the two engaged in extraordinary efforts to try to put a stop to that Congressional travesty.

Nick Katzenbach called it "outrageous"  and "nothing more or less than a private relief bill" which is "no way justified."

Bobby Kennedy said that he "objected to the basic philosophy of retroactive immunization, which might logically be applied to murder or any other crime."

How America's Democrats went from Bobby Kennedy and Nicholas Katzenbach to these scum-sucking cowards like Dianne Feinstein and Jay Rockefeller who frigging plotted in secret for months with Dick Cheney as to how they can protect lawbreaking telecoms from the consequences of their criminal behavior is a pathetic story about the victory of evil over good.

So bravo to Russ Feingold - may America find more men and women like you to replace the wastes of space in the swamp's once stately Dirksen, Russell and Hart buildings.

Russ Feingold's hometown newspaper has some praise to share with the good Connecticut Senator, Chris Dodd:

Democracy for America, the grass-roots group formed by supporters of Howard Dean's campaign for the 2004 Democratic presidential nomination, has been polling its members nationwide in recent weeks to determine if progressives can settle on a consensus candidate. Dodd had been trailing the pack -- lingering in last place. Then, on Monday, as part of a prearranged plan by Democracy for America to distribute e-mails from candidates to the group's lists, Dodd sent out a statement titled: "Restoring the Constitution."

Instead of asking for votes, Dodd wrote: "The Military Commissions Act. Warrantless wiretapping. Shredding of habeas corpus. Torture. Extraordinary rendition. Secret prisons.

"Enough is enough.

"You may have heard that I've placed a hold on any legislation that includes 'retroactive immunity' for telecom companies that helped the Bush administration spy on Americans.

"And if it comes down to it, I'll filibuster.

"This might not be customary, but my ask isn't that you vote for me in the Pulse Poll, it is that you let Democracy for America HQ know how you feel about our fight to restore the Constitution and preserve the rule of law."

If anyone thought that too noble a stance, Dodd added: "I'd like to see a little more spine, frankly, on these issues. Candidates always tell us they want to lead, but a little leadership right now would certainly be welcomed on these questions. We shouldn't have to wait to elect the next president before we finally show the courage to stand up to the grave mistakes made by this one."

The Columnist, John Nichols also points out that moderation in principle is not only a vice but it's also an electoral loser:

How powerful is constitutional renewal as a political issue? Wisconsinites already know. They re-elected Democratic U.S. Sen. Russ Feingold, the only member of the Senate to vote against the Patriot Act, by 331,000 votes in the same 2004 election when the more constitutionally cautious Democratic nominee for president was carrying the state by barely 12,000 votes.

Voters reward leaders with spine.