John Kerry Co-Sponsors Feingold Censure Bill

[globalvillage]

On May 11, John Kerry became the fourth Senator to sign on to the censure bill.

more...


http://progressive.org/mag_wx051306b

[Warren Stupidity]

1. Thank you President Kerry.

Now perhaps you and President Gore should call on the citizens of this nation to assemble peacefully in Washington DC to demand the restoration of constitutional government.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

2. Why did it take this man MONTHS? What's up with that?

Was he unsure Bush and his administration are criminal? Kerry scares me.

[blm]

5. Kerry supported censure early on - his signing on now RENEWS the story

and adds clarity to why Feingold and Durbin have been slow-walking the censure process.

[IndianaGreen]

7. Kerry scares you? You should be afraid of people like Pelosi

that put impeachment off the table. Kerry has been nothing short of magnificent since the Alito filibuster, a filibuster that Harry Reid found annoying.

[TayTay]

10. I know what you mean. Why hasn't Feingold signed the DSM letter

that came out last July. Why is it taking that man so long to sign up to investigate the pre-war intelligence. Feingold is a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee. If 6 of them sign the letter, then the investigation can be put on the schedule.

Feingold scares me.

[MH1]

14. Sheesh, I actually didn't realize that.

I didn't realize Feingold was on the Intelligence committee. That makes it much more IMPORTANT that Feingold sign the DSM letter. And much more significant that he didn't.

Sigh.

[blm]

17. Actually, I think it's only FIVE senators who need to sign the DSM inquiry

And Kerry had two of them at the time, Corzine and Durbin. Feingold chose to not sign on.

[WildEyedLiberal]

28. Amazing how that somehow is no longer a big deal for some people

[MH1]

12. Gee, why did it take THAT man MONTHS...oh he still hasn't:

This is a repost, but it sure seems to apply here:

However if we want to talk about "When a real Democrat like --- stands up", how about we talk about the effort to get an investigation of the Downing Street Minutes, which Senator Kerry spearheaded and 9 other Senators joined - but not Feingold.

If we want to talk about "When a real Democrat like --- stands up", how about we talk about the Election Reform bill Senator Clinton introduced, with Senator Kerry, that only 5 other Senators co-sponsored - and Feingold is not among them. (S.450)

If we want to talk about "When a real Democrat like --- stands up", how about we talk about the bill Senator Obama introduced, with Senators Kerry and Reid, to establish an Office of Public Integrity in the Congress and a Congressional Ethics Enforcement Commission; that no other Senators stood with these three - even Feingold didn't stand with them. (S.2259)

If we want to talk about a symbolic gesture that demonstrates what Democrats stand for, how about we talk about the Rosa Parks commemorative stamp, which 25 Dems including Senator Kerry have co-sponsored, but Feingold is notably absent from the sponsorship. (S.2154)

If I use your kind of logic, I might draw some rather unflattering conclusions about Senator Feingold for failing to stand up for these initiatives. BUT I will not do that, because I think your logic is naive and simplistic.

Damn, will Feingold ever stand with Kerry on anything?

:sarcasm:

But seriously...

Even Downing Street Minutes, Election Reform, Ethics...guess these don't matter as much?

[blm]

22. Why would a man who exposed more govt. corruption than ANY other lawmaker

in modern history scare you?

[ClassWarrior]

38. Where are YOUR Senators on the Censure Bill?...

Hmmm?

NGU.

[zulchzulu]

42. I called Kerry's office the week of Feingold's censure speech and...

Kerry's staff said he was firmly behind it.

A few weeks later on Meet The Russert, Kerry said he supported the Feingold censure resolution. This is just another example where he supports it.

No need to fear Kerry. He is consistent and on your side.

[Zhade]

45. Better late than never.

I give Kerry props on this, even if he's late to the party.

[blm]

3. Time for censure *Phase II* - second round of hearings.

Kerry signing on now renews the call - I'll bet this is where Durbin and Leahy add on, too.

Wondering now if they expected the other NSA shoe to drop and THAT is why Feingold and Durbin were slow-walking the process?

[rodeodance]

9. Roberts is in control of phase II. It is dead in the water.

[blm]

15. Nope - this is Phase II of censure for the JUDICIARY Committee Dems.

Roberts is Intel. You mixed up Iraq Intel Phase II with my thoughts about a Phase II for censure hearings.

[IndianaGreen]

4. At a minimum, censure is the first step to reign in the executive

and begin the process of restoring Congressional oversight and constituional checks and balances.

Kerry has chosen to stand for the Constitution and the Republic!

[babylonsister]

6. Wasn't their collective thought by Dems that they were going to

wait til dimson's poll numbers were really in the toilet before proceeding? Maybe the time is now ripe! It is for me.:applause:

[Warren Stupidity]

13. Nah its raining our - powder aint dry yet. nt.

[blm]

16. Or some of them knew this shoe was going to drop and would use it as an

opportunity to RENEW the call for censure and hold new hearings.

[rodeodance]

8. nominated

[proud patriot]

11. good

:-)

[JNelson6563]

18. Bravo Senator!!

:toast:

[ProSense]

19. Good, but the current resolution doesn't include illegal

spying on Americans. As Feingold points out, an investigation is needed:

Statement of U.S. Senator Russ Feingold
On the Reported Massive NSA Database of Americans' Phone Calls

May 11, 2006

This Administration’s arrogance and abuse of power should concern all Americans. That the government may be secretly collecting, and using data mining to analyze, the phone records of millions of law-abiding Americans, as reported in the press today, is a frightening prospect. I am unaware of this program, and Congress needs to find out exactly what the Administration is doing and whether it is legal. It is time for the Administration to come clean with Congress and the American people. We can effectively fight terrorism and protect privacy, the rule of law, and separation of powers, but only if we have a President who believes in these principles.

http://feingold.senate.gov/~feingold/statements/06/05/20060511NSA.html

The calls should be for investigation and impeachment!

[blm]

21. Kerry signing on now will renew calls for further investigations. This may

be what he, Durbin and Leahy were waiting for. All 3 supported censure but were adamant about more investigations, so Feingold slow-walking it with Durbin was absolutel the right call. I'd bet Russell Tice gave them a heads up this would come out. Or Randall Beers. We'll soon find out.

[ProSense]

23. You're most likely right.

I'm pretty certain that any real investigation of Bush (on any issue from Iraq to spying) will conclude that the broke law (many times over).

[Dunvegan]

20. I applaud Sen. Kerry's joining for censure...whatever the reason.

I do have to note, when John Kerry's diary at DailyKos got a grilling, it was a real "We the People" moment, where the posters kept demanding, in post after post, why Kerry hadn't signed on to Feingold's bill.

And, you see...viola! Kerry signs on.

This takes nothing away from Kerry, who's frying fish at a prodigious pace, but does reinforce what Gore said in his speech regarding protecting the Constitution from the current administration: it ULTIMATELY was up to the authority NAMED in the Constitution: WE THE PEOPLE to defend and retain our power in this federation.

I like it. And, again, thank you John Kerry for listening to your constituents and acting.

[blm]

24. Kerry had signed on before the Kos "grilling" - I would say you are not

factoring in TIMING. As in - Kerry supported censure early on, but his SIGNING on now RENEWS censure as a story and renews the need and call for further investigations.

Leahy and Durbin supported censure, too, but were also oddly slow-walking the censure process with Feingold. Want to bet they sign on, aswell or use it to get more hearings?

Kerry is one of the most principled lawmakers this nation has ever had. His entire record in governance proves it. Not many can say the same.

[karynnj]

44. True - on Kos, Kerry in his responses

mentioned that he had long ago said he was for it publicly. He seemed surprised that people didn't know that and also mentioned that Feingold spoke positively on his Iraq plan. It sounds like there was never a problem between Kerry and Feingold on this issue.

[MH1]

26. What blm said

Feingold had already publicly thanked Kerry for coming out in support of censure. But a bunch of posters at dailykos were unaware of that or didn't care.

There are a lot of possible reasons that a Senator would publicly support a measure but not have their name listed as cosponsor in the Congressional Record. It may be as simple as not getting around to the formality, once the other Senators know you're on board (they do count votes and support on these things). Or maybe there's other reasons. Since I have never walked in those shoes, I really don't know the reason.

[WildEyedLiberal]

27. Also, I was under the impression Feingold wanted it to be bipartisan

I was always under the impression that Feingold didn't want it to end up being the "Feingold-Kennedy-Durbin-Kerry Boxer Act" because honestly, that's like the Senate Liberalapalooza Act. I had been under the impression that he had hoped for more moderate conservatives or centrists to sign on so this didn't end up looking partisan.

Unfortunately, liberal partisans are the only ones who give a shit about the Constitution, I guess.

That said, I have no idea why Kerry cosponsoring the censure versus supporting it was such a fucking big deal. I could name about 10 excellent bills and measures Kerry has sponsored that Feingold declined to add his name to, and if I wanted to, I could go into every Feingold thread and demand to know why Feingold hasn't signed on to the DSM letter, or Kerry's withdrawal from Iraq bill, or his healthcare for children bill. But I won't.

[blm]

30. Whoa, whoa, whoa...I thought most senate Dems were supporting Kid's First

healthcare bill already. Hard to believe Feingold chose not to - he and Kerry are usually dependable votes on that issue. Maybe he's supporting it but hasn't made a public statement, yet. Or supporting but not co-sponsoring. I really don't see him holding back on that bill.

[WildEyedLiberal]

32. But is he cosponsoring?

That seems to be the real issue here. It certainly wasn't enough for some of the partisans here that Kerry was supporting the censure - oh no, he has to COSPONSOR it, or else they wouldn't be satisfied.

So I'm just holding Feingold to the same standard they held Kerry to, and I will continue to ask them why Feingold has not co-sponsored every single excellent bill Kerry has introduced. Because they have made it patently clear that support isn't enough - one must COSPONSOR a bill to show one's "support."

So I'm just waiting for the same brigade who attacked Kerry for supporting, but not cosponsoring the censure bill to explain to me why it's okay for Feingold to have not signed the DSM letter, not cosponsored Kerry's healthcare bill, and not cosponsored the withdraw from Iraq bill.

Of course, if Feingold HAS cosponsored the bill, I would apologize for the misconception. But I do not think he has, so I'm just waiting for an explanation from all those who felt Kerry's censure support wasn't good enough.

[globalvillage]

33. Sen Feingold has not sponsored Kids First

S.114
Title: A bill to amend titles XIX and XXI of the Social Security Act to ensure that every uninsured child in America has health insurance coverage, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Sen Kerry, John F. (introduced 1/24/2005) Cosponsors (10)
Related Bills: H.R.1668
Latest Major Action: 1/24/2005 Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COSPONSORS(10), ALPHABETICAL : (Sort: by date)
Sen Boxer, Barbara - 4/27/2005 Sen Cantwell, Maria - 1/24/2005
Sen Corzine, Jon S. - 1/24/2005 Sen Dayton, Mark - 3/7/2005
Sen Johnson, Tim - 9/14/2005 Sen Kennedy, Edward M. - 1/24/2005
Sen Landrieu, Mary L. - 4/28/2005 Sen Lautenberg, Frank R. - 1/24/2005
Sen Mikulski, Barbara A. - 9/6/2005 Sen Murray, Patty - 1/24/2005

[farmbo]

25. Thank you Senator (and I apologize for questioning your ballisiness!)

eom

[lala_rawraw]

29. We are long past censure!!!

[Independent_Liberal]

31. Thanks Kerry!

Glad to see you supporting this.

:)

[politicasista]

34. kick and recommend!

:kick:

[wisteria]

35. Kerry co-sponsored!!

I will have to take a second look at this action now. I wasn't in favor of this at all,I thought we should hold out and do more than just slap Bush on the wrist. Now, with the NSA data mining issue being added into the mix, I am inclined to support it, especially since Kerry has taken an additional step since agreeing with Feingold and now co-sponsoring it.

[Vidar]

36. Good, but hardly timely.

[Clarkie1]

37. Kerry likes to spend a lot of time deliberating. n/t

[blm]

43. An admirable trait for thinking men - but when his crew was under heavy

gunfire he acted quickly, courageously, and decisively. All good traits, as well, and at the appropriate time.

I wonder why anyone would not see the ability to deliberate a good thing - Kerry was a prosecutor, after all, and we surely want deliberative people in positions of power, especially with powers that effect our very freedom.

[blm]

41. WHY? You would prefer censure not be RESURRECTED as an issue to pave the

way for MORE hearings and investigations?

Kerry supported it before, but held off co-sponsoring while pushing the import of investigatory hearings.

People either GET how the senate operates or they don't. - Leahy and Durbin support censure, too, but they are using censure as a tool to get more investigations. Slow-walking censure in this way is what Feingold WANTED, and it is certainly working out better this way.

Imagine if the censure vote happened quickly the way the Repubs wanted, joined by the incomprehensive kneejerkers who demanded Dem senators declare imnmediately how they would vote.

[Vidar]

47. No, for the most part I agree with you.

[ProSense]

39. Kerry signing on as a co-sponsor puts censure back in the news

Kerry adds support to Feingold's censure measure

May 14, 2006 (WASHINGTON) - Wisconsin Senator Russ Feingold's measure to censure President Bush has gained a third supporter.

Massachusetts Senator John Kerry has officially signed on to the bill. He joins fellow Democrats Tom Harkin from Iowa and Barbara Boxer from California as co-sponsors.

It's unclear whether the Judiciary Committee will ever bring up the censure proposal for a vote.

Kerry initially held off on supporting the measure. He said the president should be held accountable but Kerry wanted to make sure a censure was the best way to do it.

Feingold introduced the resolution in March to censure Bush for authorizing domestic eavesdropping and misleading Americans about its legality.

Republican opponents have dismissed the resolution as political grandstanding and say it would only weaken the presidency.

http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?section=local&id=4171103

Here's a snip of his MTP interview on April 9:

MR. GONZALES: The president has the constitutional authority to make the decision as to what, what is in that national interest of the country.

REP. NADLER: For whatever reason he feels like.

MR. GONZALES: He has the authority under the Constitution to make that determination.

REP. NADLER: OK.

(End videotape)

RUSSERT: Do you agree with that legal reasoning?

SEN. KERRY: I think it’s time for the attorney general to start standing up and protecting the Constitution and the country, and not the politics of this administration. The fact is, on, you know—I mean, on one side, this is the first evidence we’ve had that the president was actually in the White House loop. On the second side, it is wrong for the president of the United States, who has the right, obviously, to declassify material, to declassify it selectively in order to buttress phony arguments to go to war, and not declassify the counter arguments. And it is wrong for the president to do it in a way that attacks people politically. That’s what this was for. This was not a declassification in order to really educate America. This was a declassification order to mislead America, in order to mislead them about that yellow cake from Nigeria, the uranium material, and in order to buttress their phony argument about the war. And I think it’s a disgrace. The fact is...

MR. RUSSERT: But it’s not—it’s not illegal.

SEN. KERRY: Well, the president has the right, obviously, to declassify. Whether he has the right to declassify for these kinds of political purposes, I don’t know. Let me read you what his father said. Do you know what his father said? George Herbert Walker Bush said in 1991 at the dedication of the George Bush CIA headquarters, he said, “Even though I’m a tranquil guy now at this stage of my life, I have nothing but contempt and anger for those who betray the trust by exposing the name of our sources. They are, in my view, the most insidious of traitors.”

MR. RUSSERT: But there’s no one suggesting...

SEN. KERRY: George Herbert Walker—no.

MR. RUSSERT: ...there’s no one suggesting that President Bush revealed the name...

SEN. KERRY: No, absolutely nothing. But one thing led to another, Tim. This administration did reveal the name. We know repeatedly now from the Fitzpatrick documents that not only Scooter Libby but Karl Rove and others told the name to people. They were using the name, and, and I’m—I just think all Americans are tired of this. We now have evidence in a court in San Francisco that documents show that they were eavesdropping through I think it was AOL, that they were getting into American accounts. So there’s now evidence, not just of foreign eavesdropping surveillance, but of domestic eavesdropping surveillance on a blanket basis.

MR. RUSSERT: Senator Russ Feingold, your Democratic colleague from Wisconsin, said the president should be censured for his eavesdropping program because he did not seek authority that Feingold insists is demanded by statute. Would you vote to censure President Bush?

SEN. KERRY: Yes.

MR. RUSSERT: What would be the penalty?

SEN. KERRY: The penalty is the censure itself, is the reprimand by the United State Congress for action that is inappropriate.

MR. RUSSERT: Did he violate the Constitution?

SEN. KERRY: He violated the law, in my judgment.

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/12169680

[mdmc]

40. thanks Kerry

[Rainscents]

46. Kick!

Thank you, President Kerry!

[Vektor]

48. Great news! Our Senators working together, getting things done...

If the rest of the party (pols and voters alike) could follow suit like these fine gentleman, and work together, we'd be unstoppable.

[blm]

49. Too many are fearful of being called "partisan" or liberals, even though

there is nothing liberal about censure - in fact, censure IS the SOFTEST answer to Bush's crimes, while IMPEACHMENT would be the LEGAL REMEDY of choice.