Blue Mass Group

Reality-based commentary on politics.

Democrats for telecom immunity?

By

>> UPDATE By Bob: This is what the poster is talking about:

After more than a year of heated political wrangling, the Senate handed the White House a major victory Tuesday by voting to broaden the government’s spy powers and to give legal protection to phone companies that cooperated in President Bush’s warrantless eavesdropping program.

According to the comments, Obama opposed. Clinton punted. <<

The following Democratic Senators just voted for telecom immunity.

Jay Rockefeller WV
Evan Bayh IA
Daniel Inouye HI
Tim Johnson SD
Herb Kohl WI
Mary Landrieu LA
Claire McCaskill MO
Mark Pryor AR
Blanche Lincoln AR
Dianne Feinstein CA
Ken Salazar CO
Tom Carper DE
Barbara Mikulski MD
Jim Webb VA

That’s a huge block of moderate Democrats.

How do we fix this?

Please share widely!
fb-share-icon
Tweet
0

Comments

    • Oh yeah lets primary challenge Jim Webb since that will result with a more progressive Senator…oh wait it will result in a Republican Senate!

      <

      p>Come on guys, you primary challenge people like Finestein and Lieberman from liberal states, thats all well and good, but to demand orthodoxy from moderate Senators in Red States is just a foolish strategy.

      <

      p>To be fair this Congress has failed on many fronts but it has stalled and curtailed anymore damage Dubya could do. I think its resolute against going to war with Iran, resolute with ending the Iraq war, and resolute on domestic issues like SCHIP. To say that its occasionally spineless and gutless especially on security and civil liberties issues is accurate, but to say that orthodoxy is worth risking the gains we have made, and in my view will make with a Democratic president, is really foolish.  

      • Did I say anything about Jim Webb?

        <

        p>I’m sorry I didn’t create a detailed list of which Senators I think deserve a primary challenge and which ones don’t. Typically, I leave the democratic process to decide that. Moreover, I’m sorry that I won’t create one of them now, because I quite simply have other things to do. However, someone like Senator Feinstein in California absolutely deserves to go… and ditching her wouldn’t in any way harm our chances to actually keep the Senate… or expand our lead. It’s safe blue state with plenty of good Democrats who could run an insurgent campaign against her, if they start early and hard enough. A lot of people thought targeting Lieberman would hurt our chances in being able to win senate seats too back in ’06… it was a flawed argument then and a flawed argument now.

          • but I feel neither confident in analyzing it nor willing to dictate what I think is worthy of a primary challenge when ultimately its the voters who decide that. Obviously, at least one person think John Kerry doesn’t deserve to be in office anymore… I’m not sure if it’ll be a competitive election, but it’s a part of the democratic process.

  2. Or has she become more conservative lately?

    <

    p>I would expect this from Dianne Feinstein, who is no liberal (supports death penalty and flag amendment).

    <

    p>What about Lieberman?  Did he vote the right way or is he not counted as a Democrat anymore?

    <

    p>Most of the others are from conservative states, but they still should have done the right thing.

    • but wouldn’t have been on the right side here.
      Mikulski goes over to the dark side more and more frequently.  

  3. is on Clinton’s short list for VEEP.  Ugh.  That’s enough to make me work harder for Obama right there.

    • Doesn’t Evan Bayh permanently reside on every Democrat’s short list of VPs?

      <

      p>I guess the idea is that Democrats can’t win unless the message is made really, really muddy. Putting a crypto-Republican on the ticket is just a start.

      • Somebody might want to correct that (Indiana is “IN”).  Also, having been in Indiana for about four years recently (I earned a BA from Purdue in 2005), I can tell you that his 2004 opponent, Butler sociology professor Marvin Scott, pointed out repeatedly that when it comes to major issues, Evan Bayh votes with most Democrats.  I’m trying to find the comparison that he did on the issues, but all I can find is “Evan Bayh=Hillary.”  Oh well.  I guess that, and the fact that he did not run the greatest of campaigns, would explain why Bayh cruised to re-election in a year that Dubya carried Indiana and his former budget director, Mitch Daniels, was elected governor over one of Bayh’s apparent heirs, then-Gov. Joe Kernan, who assumed that role when Bayh’s former lieutenant governor, Governor Frank O’Bannon, suffered a stroke and died less than a year earlier.

        <

        p>The point is, he seems like a “crypto-Republican” because of his membership in the DLC, but when push comes to shove, he votes for the issues you care about.

    • These short lists are usually fiction, the type written by pundits on their fifth martini.

      <

      p>The short list for either candidate should be James Webb and Bill Richardson.

      • …I think it would be foolish for the Dem nominee not to put the runner up as #1 on the VP list. This primary has shown phenomenal support for both HRC and BHO, I can’t see how any ticket could be stronger that the two current juggernauts combined. Even if Webb or Richardson were technically more qualified for the VP position, Hillary and Barack already have the forward momentum, the infrastructure, the profile, the polish, the poise, the fundraising, the supporters, the enthusiasm. I also think internally it would make a good partnership for the party because when the candidate of enthusiastic supporters loose, they become resentful to the winner.

        <

        p>The Democrats already have a consensus on who the two best candidates are, why ignore or discount that consensus? But what do I know? And it’s not like I’m not going to vote for the Dem ticket. They could run Hillary/Hulk Hogan and get my vote.  

        • I like BBQ ribs.  I also like fried fish.  That doesn’t mean that I want tartar sauce on my ribs, or BBQ sauce on my fish.  Two elements that are good in isolation don’t make a good mix.

          <

          p>A Hillary/Obama ticket worries me for this reason:
          nothing on national security.  Hillary’s foreign policy record is shaky enough, but on national security nothing of consequence.  Obama, less on either score.

          <

          p>To take on McCain, I think you need to have some dash of gravitas on national security.  I think you also need to make a credible argument on foreign policy with someone at some point.  From a general election perspective, this is the weakness of both candidates, and a VP pick is a decent way to rectify it.

          <

          p>Plus, I can’t imagine either one playing second fiddle to the other.

          • I once thought that Gore was a poor choice for VP in 1992 for the same reason, and it worked well.

          • I think a lot of people are upset with Hillary about Iraq, but to argue that she doesn’t have foreign policy expertise or an understanding of the military is a bit foolish given her committee appointments and praise from Generals. So, we may not agree with Hillary, but anyone who’s opposed to the war in Iraq would – I’m sure – prefer to vote for Hillary, who’s publicly committed to getting our troops out of Iraq, than McCain, who’s publicly committed to keeping them in there for a 100 years.

  4. for now, as outrageous as their votes may be. The rest need to be challenged as soon as possible.
    A number of Democrats from red and swing states had the common sense and courage (?) to oppose this abuse of power. Tester and Baucus from Montana, Dorgan from ND, and Casey from PA of particular note.
    Republicans we need to focus on are our neighbors, Sununu and Collins, as well as Coleman in MN.
    Getting a majority in the Senate in 2006 was only a first step, in view of this. We need to greatly expand this with more progressive members and also get rid of Harry Reid as Majority Leader.
    BTW, the list of bad players should include Nelson FL and NE, Stabenow MI, Conrad ND

    • I might accept the give-Red-state-senators-a-pass argument if this were a social issue or some stupid, symbolic vote on Iran. However, I don’t think that there’s a groundswell of support for telephone companies brewing in South Dakota or Indiana.

      • However, the debate was successfully framed as a national security issue.
        It’s not clear whether these folks are on the take, whether they’re afraid that they’ll be labeled weak on terrorism, or whether they actually believe that telecom immunity is important for the country. I suspect it’s all of these in various combinations.

    • Obama voted yea, meaning he was for the Dodd amendment and against immunity, McCain voted nay, meaning against the amendment and for immunity. That’s what I meant when I reversed the yea/nay above.  

  7. A premier product of the netroots community?
    Is Washington part of the Borg(Star Trek).
    They will be assimulated?

  8. The party leadership, Feinstein and Reid, are often disappointing, but with Bush polling at 30% it still mystifies me when they cave in to him.

    <

    p>Votes like these remind of why I support MoveOn and DFA, but not the DNC, DCCC, or DSCC. It’s not enough to be a Democrat. You have to be a Democrat who stands for something.

      • The Democratic party won’t reform itself. We need progressives who value platform over PR to get involved.

        <

        p>It wasn’t the party establishment that elected Deval Patrick or got Barack Obama this far.

        • Given voters’s discontent as of late, and the fact that the Independent Party in th is country does seem to be making a comeback, the idea of a third, albeit independent party may well be an idea whose time has come.

    • Reid voted no. He didn’t cave.

      <

      p>I’m no huge Reid fan either, but he fought on this one.

      • on this one. Sure he voted “no” but he is uniquely responsible for Rockefeller’s telecom immunity version being the base bill rather than that coming out of Leahy’s Judiciary Committee. There’s no way this bill would have passed without Reid completely lying down. He manipulated the process to the advantage of Bush and the telecoms and then has the gall to pretend with his “no” vote that he was against it all along. Absolutely pathetic!

  10. A). Either write, call or email whoever any of the above-listed Democrat(s) represent your district to make your discontent known.

    <

    p>B)  If, after letter-writing, telephoning, or emailing, or whatever, s/he doesn’t capitulate and vote against the telecom immunity, then get them in the voting booth next election, and kick them out of office.

    • on some of which he voted no. In all cases he was opposed to telecom immunity and for keeping the FISA court relevant.

  12. The ACLU recommends we write for removing immunity in the reconciliation bill between the House and Senate.  The House bill gives no such immunity.

    <

    p>This whole immunity situation will be explained when the political contributions are published some time from now and the senators are shown to have been greased well.  But, that is some time down the road and this will all be forgotten by the sheeple.  

    <

    p>Don’t these senators and congresspeople ever feel dirty?  Now Congress is grilling a man that plays a kid’s game professionally.  They want to know if he used drugs.  Shouldn’t they be grilling people that may be war criminals, profiteers, torturers?  I guess it is all show business.  Sound and fury.  

  13. These FISA votes are an example of what is infuriating about Democrats in Congress. What could an unKerry accomplish with this in the Senate and how?

      • What I hear from the O’Reilly folks is that this is an instance where Kerry is not being a leader. They then talk about O’Reilly’s leadership attributes.

        <

        p>However, leadership absent a strategy is just posturing. So what I’d like to hear is what the strategy is.

        <

        p>Come to think of it, I’d also like to hear what Kerry’s and Kennedy’s strategy is with this stuff. Is everyone just waiting for MoveOn to save the day?

Archives