Feingold, Murtha, Kerry, Kennedy....One thing in common

[Armstead]

They are different from one anotehr in their brand of Democratic ideology, and have their own styles.

But they do have one thing in common. They all got frustrated with the glacial pace of the Democratic Party, and took brave steps to move issues forward.

Feingold put talk of actual action against Preident Bush on the table. Censure at the least, and would opoen the door to actually talk about ipeachment in the mainstream.

Murtha put Iraq on the table. A hawk, he made it safe for Democrats who supported the war to actually say "I was wrong. Invading Iraq was wrong. Staying there is wrong. Let's look at how we can get out now."

Kerry and Kennedy pushed for a filibuaster against Alito.

Unfortunately, they also had to fight their own party to do things that should be second nature for the liberal opposition party.

They all had mixed results. Feingold ws unfortunately shunned for his efforts. But it at least did widen the debate over how to deal with Bush. Murtha put the Iraq War opposition on the front burner, and pounded it into the mainstream. Kerry and Kennedy failed to muster enough votes, but they energized the grass roots and they forced their peers in the Senate to listen to their constituents more.

We owe them all a round of things. It's just a shame that they had to wade through the thickets of their own parties.

[second edition]

1. Good observations and a good post. n/t

[rndmprsn]

2. great post

[ginnyinWI]

3. When the going gets tough

and the party is out of power, that's when you see the real patriots out there fighting the fight anyway. Great post. :)

[jillan]

4. My fantasy

Kerry, Kennedy, Boxer, Feingold, Leahy...a few others
would form their own little group in the senate.

Since they are the ones that are willing to stand up
and to say what needs to be said..it could be a great
asset if they joined forces and worked as a team.

[countmyvote4real]

5. And yet some are more comitted t han others...

For my argument, I'm just talking about the three Senators you cited: Kennedy, Kerry and Feingold. My impression is that Feingold opposes GOP-think more often than the other two. If the 2 Ks can’t sign on to a censure this clear, they should retire and hope for an Al Gore epiphany. Feingold appears to have supported the various steps of the 2 Ks, but he is still the only Senator to vote against the original Patriot Act.

[jillan]

6. And the 2 K's started the

filibuster of Alito.

Boxer was the only dem to stand up after the election.

Leahy has printed an awesome list of the failures of this administration.

They are the best of the Senate.

[countmyvote4real]

11. I love Boxer and Leahy. They weren't part of the original salute.

And you're right about Boxer being the only Senator to challenge the 2000 vote. God bless her and shame on all the others at that time including Feingold. However, he saw the light pretty quickly after 9/11. Catch up is fine. It's very much appreciated. Action is applauded.

[karynnj]

15. No Senator questioned 2000, Boxer questioned 2004

So that kind of kills your argument there.

[countmyvote4real]

16. Oh, I'm so bad and forgetful.

It took Boxer a few more years get her epiphany.

[electropop]

22. I still love Boxer.

She'd be a great VP for Conyers.

[WildEyedLiberal]

7. So actually doing something concrete to keep Alito out means nothing?

Your priorities certainly are fucked up.

Frankly I question the wisdom of ANYONE who would question Ted Kennedy's (or John Kerry's) commitment to liberal ideals.

[countmyvote4real]

10. I guestioned Kerry's 2004 vote recounts.

He didn't take that very seriously. I don't deny his Alito efforts, but it was kind of late to lead the call after he failed to challenge his own campaign. I'm glad he did and wish more had followed. I'm not making excuses for the lame imposters, I just think that Feingold has the stronger record.

[blm]

31. There isn't anyone in congress with a stronger record against corruption

than John Kerry. NO ONE.

Even against his own party's wishes, he investigated and exposed IranContra, BCCI, illegal wars in Central America and CIA drugrunning.

Kerry sought further investigation into the Downing Street Memos - Feingold refused to sign the letter of inquiry that 9 other senators did sign.

Feingold is just as much a mixed bag as any other senator,and overall has a good senate record, but it's absolute revisionism to claim that ANYONE has a stronger record than John Kerry. You wouldn't know HALF the stuff about BushInc that we know now if Kerry's efforts hadn't exposed so much of the truth during his investigations and put those truths into the congressional record.

[karynnj]

33. Putting the truths into theCongressional Record is important

The media marginalized the reporters who spelled out these truths - so much of this isn't in history books or non- fiction accounts of the time period. I have even seen at least on book on the Iran/Contra hearings, where Kerry's name is not in the index! For historians in the future trying to figure out what went wrong, Kerry's studies will be invaluable. (In fact, I would guess that the RW likely had no one they wanted in the White House less than Kerry. Why? Every President, no matter how weak, ends up with serious biographies written about them. Examining Kerry's past, digs up a lot of rot that was the illegal under belly of the RW.)

[Usrename]

20. That is some awful soft concrete you're standing on!

42 voted against Alito! Thought he should not be a justice! Get it?

They only needed 41 to stop him! Get it!

Horray for the HEROIC EFFORTS for the fillibuster!

They couldn't even get 41 out of 42 that don't think he is qualified!!!!!!

Are you getting it yet???????

[karynnj]

23. Kerry and Kennedy

got no support from the leadership who publicly said it would not succeed a week before the vote. Reid was very obvious, even saying he wanted to concentrate on the Republican corruption issue. In fact, that issue had likely gone as far as it was going without new indictments. Biden, announced he would vote for cloture once - which made his vote worthless. (If he was the one that took it over the top, Frist could just ask for a second vote.) Obama used his Sunday talk show time to lament that the committee and the party didn't organize earlier - rather than using his legal brilliance and incredible articulateness to communicate the balance of powers and unitary President issues.

The Democrats on the judiciary committee had done a poor job on this. Feingold was probably the best,but none of them did a great job and some did an awful job, including Kennedy and Biden. If Kerry were on that committee, it could have made the difference. He would have been in the position where it was his area to lead in and he has been consider one of the best questioners on all his committees. (He and Feingold can be seen together on the SFRC - Kerry is by far the stronger.)

Kerry's last speech was absolutely brilliant - even though the Republicans didn't let him finish it -He did what could he done and he did it without the support of the MSM. Feingold is getting a fraction of the flack that Kerry did.

At the end of the fight, in some of his last words to the Senate, Senator Kennedy praised his fellow Massahusetts Senator for the passion and energy he brought to the fight. I assume Senator Kerry valued Kennedy's words and his own internal values that he expressed when he said it would be too late for people to admit they should have fought as Judge Alito's rulings play out.

People here saw who said what in that hectic week - Kerry and Kennedy did everything they could that week. We saw the people who dragged their feet, those (like Durbin) who joined the fight, and those who stayed silent (like Feingold - who didn't announce his vote or (I think) instruct his staff to say which way he would vote on cloture. People here had posted that mentioned his philosophy on appointments - immediately giving him a pass.) I'm sure K & K knew where he stood, but he gave absolutley no assistance on this - which as a judiciary member he easily could have.

[blm]

30. The filibuster planning should've started straight from judiciary hearings

but no judiciary member would stand up with Kennedy. Kerry said he would IF he had to, but urged other senators to do so, since he was scheduled in Europe for his own finance committee duties.

NO judiciary Dem would stand with Kennedy, even after Kerry left for Europe. So, Kerry was stuck announcing filibuster from Europe and had to leave his work there to get back to lead a filibuster that SHOULD HAVE been in the planning much earlier. Dems lost TWO WEEKS thanks to judiciary Dems refusing to stand with Kennedy to lead it after they sat through the hearings.

Yes, they then supported filibuster, but it was crucial for them, the judiciary committee Dems, to plan filibuster, too.

[WildEyedLiberal]

36. Get what?

That your comment was utterly, thoroughly, and completely pointless?

Yeah, I got that.

[Usrename]

40. If that isn't the point, then what is the point?

Speak slowly because I am a little slow, possibly retarded, because I don't see that there is another point here.

42 don't think he should be a judge.

They only needed 41 to stop him.

They did not.

Heroic? Not the word I would use.

[karynnj]

12. Both have done a great job fighting Bush

You could argue that:

Kerry led the Alito filibuster not Feingold (Feingold voted no on cloture but didn't lead)

Kerry led on an amendment to get oversight on clandestine prisons

Kerry led on oversight of port security by getting an amendment passed to audit how the money on securing them was spent (only about 20% of Congress' budgeted money was spent mostly on worthless projects). The report just came out (excellent timing), Kerry requested it mid last year.

Kerry wrote the letter requesting the intelligence committee do WMD part 2 (DSM) - Feingold didn't sign

Kerry was easily the lead person defending Murtha - with a speech in the Senate, several (at least 4) TV interviews within the first week, emails sent to millions of people within days of Republican bashing.

Kerry spoke out on Katrina - put together the Small Business package with Snowe and has held the feet of the Bush administration's SBA to the fire - the transcripts of those sessions of the Small Business Committee may be the toughest interrogation given to ANY Bush administrator.

Kerry voted against Dr Rice, Feingold didn't

Kerry voted against Roberts, Feingold didn't

Kerry led several ANWR fights (Feingold voted with him)- many times he won

Kerry led on Small Business related programs (I think Feingold voted for it)- many actually passed

Kerry led on several veterans benefits (Feingold voted for it)- many that succeeded

On your examples:
Feingold is leading on censure (Kerry's office says he will vote for it, he had a few weeks earlier called for a special investigator)

Feingold voted no on the Patriot Act, Kerry, yes - as it passed overwhelmingly - but both Kerry and Feingold are sponsors with Kennedy, Durbin and others of a bill to fix the remaining problems. (This may be different philosophies - the revised bill now in place replaces the worst original one and when there is a shift in the house and Senate they can pass the amendments. The alternative was to keep extending the original bill for changes we weren't going to get.)

If you look at this, I see two things:
- For the most part they are allies on the same side.
- Kerry has led at least as many things against Bush - the DSM investigation is at least equal to the censure motion.
-Feingold has said that Kerry, Kennedy, Levin and himself are the leading edge in fighting Bush on what to do with Iraq.

Caveat: I doubt this is a full list for either.

[Dr Ron]

14. Liberal Rankings

There is a limit to the validity of these rankings, but I find it amusing that Kerry has a higher liberal voting record percentage than Feingold virtually every year per National Journal.

More information here:
http://blog.thedemocraticdaily.com/?p=2053

[TayTay]

21. I agree. They should retire. Then maybe we can get more Nelsons

in the Senate. Or perhaps a Leibermann or two. Those Kennedy and Kerry types are bad for the liberal wing of the party. I say we tell them to retire and make room for people like Ben Nelson or Mary Landreiu or Mark Pryor. These are real Democrats who know how to not offend anyone!

Wow, what an epiphany, I have seen the light. What the Senate needs is more people who look innocent on TV and know how to not do anything controversial.

Be careful what you wish for honey.

[MH1]

25. The "2 Ks" have more *consistently* fought Bush, AND done it using

leadership and teamwork to include others.

See karynnj's post for a long but incomplete list: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2525999&mesg_id=2526075

Now for just ONE item where Feingold failed to stand with the other Dem leaders against Bush: the letter to the Senate intelligence committee to investigate the Downing Street Minutes. Kerry initiated that letter - he was the FIRST Senator to even mention DSM as an issue, and he followed up with action. He circulated the letter for about two weeks and got 9 other Senators to sign it (including Kennedy) - but where was Feingold? Why didn't he sign it? Did he think DSM wasn't important? Or was it because HIS name wasn't going to be in lights, so he thought it wasn't worth his effort? Is there something going on where Feingold refuses to support Kerry, or enlist Kerry's support in a team effort, because he wants to take Kerry out of 2008? You know, the Kerry-bashing threads jumped onto DU awfully fast after Feingold sprung his little solo censure surprise. Between that and the DSM letter I'm starting to wonder what he's about.

[karynnj]

28. The contrast of the DSM vs Censure issues tells a lot about the 2 men

Kerry quietly worked with the other Senators to get 9 other Senators on board. After 2 weeks, when he saw he would not get more, he sent the letter to the appropiate committee. He also announced the act to the press. Kerry did not say even one word against any fellow Democrat who didn't join him. Kerry was able to use his letter and the Roberts response to back up Reid when Roberts lied and said they were working on it - after he told Kerry they wouldn't. Kerry's office had both letters up within hours.

Feingold announced his censure on TV before telling anyone. Two days later he went to the media bashing his fellow Democrats for not following. Although many had demanded investigations and spoke out on the spying - many calling it illegal, Feingold said all who didn't follow him in 2 days were "cowering". Way to go! Just as Democrats are getting better on being seen as strong - Feingold says they are cowering.

One of these two men showed respect to those around him.

[ginnyinWI]

32. Right on!

You described the differences very well! It's leadership v.s. being a maverick. Which one would make a better president!

For Feingold to tear down members of his own party makes him look weak and whiny, not strong.

I think Russ has the right convictions, he just needs better political sense.

[blm]

29. You don't understand that Feingold WANTED censure slowed down in committee

for further debate and investigation?

What did YOU want? A rushed vote the next day just like Cheney and Frist wanted?

Get real and LEARN the facts - Feingold got what he WANTED - the issue of censure into committee. Kennedy and Leahy had already requested more documents from NSA to start the INVESTIGATION that Feingold wanted.

Don't you GET that? Those who want to force senators to rush declarations of votes are doing exactly what the GOP wanted. They want quick vote and then MOVE ON - When Feingold got censure into commtttee last Tuesday was the time to SLOW DOWN and access more documents for investigation. JUST AS RUSS WANTED.

How dense are people that they end up siding with the GOP's preferred actions on this?

[wisteria]

8. Good post, I like John kerry and happen to think the filibuster was

more important than a premature censure of the President. That could have waited and been investigated later. The Alito filibuster could not wait. It took a lot for Kerry to do this and for Kennedy to back him. He didn't seem to get the same amount of positive responses that Feingold did, yet Kerry was fighting for civil rights, woman's rights, personal freedoms privacy rights.

[sandnsea]

9. Gosh

Reid shut down the Senate to push the Iraq intelligence investigations. The entire party killed Social Security privatization last year. Kerry pushed "Home for the Holidays" last year to further the focus on Iraq. They blocked the Bolton nomination, forcing a recess appointment. Until a few days ago, they had successfully blocked drilling in ANWR. I can't even begin to count all the good things Democrats have done in the last year. Maybe if the grassroots got behind them with support instead of throwing rocks from the sideline, the media would recognize the party is a force to be reckoned with and we'd have see some real power.

[Armstead]

26. I thought of Reid, but that was more of a group effort

I didn't say they were the only Democratic Senators who have done courageous things. But they were the ones who came to mind in terms of takling solitary stands on issues or actions thar should have been a natural for all (or at least most) Democrats to support.

As for Social Security reform, the Republicans are the ones who really killed it. They recognized very quickly that the vast majority of voters wouldn't go for that one, so they cut their losses and abandoned that plan.

[jenndar]

13. K & R. Thanks for your observations.

[msgadget]

17. K &R

This would make a good post for your JOURNAL, Armstead. :)

[kerrygoddess]

18. They're all heros!

:kick:

[Senator]

19. 2nd Thing: Proved there's NO Downside to Acting

They are prime examples to hold up to our perennial "we can't, because..." crowd, which is usually found among the DC/Euphemedia Analstocracy.

The chatterers quickly reversed themselves and continue to give Mr. Murtha a wide berth. They also realized that their "Davos digs" weren't even all that funny inside the salons of Georgetown. They'll also soon see the fallacy of their current wishful thinking -- that talk of censure/impeachment will "energize the right."

How do I know this oasis will soon vanish for them?

Because the NY Times reported the new backlash as a fact -- supported only by the claim of it by Paul Weyrich (who even had to admit "perhaps, just perhaps"). Also, while reporting this soon-nami of backlash, CNN's blogwatcher felt compelled to include that this was a "top down, not bottom up" RNC email effort.

Perhaps these examples, and an extra week at home with real people, will convince our fearful "leaders" that there's no downside to actually leading. That the vast majority of the public is poised to support anyone who will confront this never-legitimate cabal that has shamed our once-great nation -- made us torturers to the world -- squandered our national treasure on their masturbatory military escapades -- burned the constitution to fuel their terrist snark hunt -- and terrorized the nation into war with "mushroom cloud" bomb threats.

Perhaps they'll choose duty over complicity.

As Weyrich says, "perhaps, just perhaps."

---
www.january6th.org

[Admiral Loinpresser]

24. I would add Gore to the list.

Both for the IWR, which he opposed, and for Kyoto. He personally negotiated the treaty in 1997 and yet he got no support from any Dem senator (including Wellstone!). He has been struggling to save the planet tirelessly while most Democrats have dithered.

[Armstead]

27. Good point -- I didn;t include him because he's not a Senator

That list struck me becuse they were all current senators who were acting as Senators.

But you're right, Gore has done the same type of thing outside the halls of Congress.

[emulatorloo]

34. Kick n/t

[cascadiance]

35. Let's not make this so much a competition...

There are things that each senator/congressperson has done that we are proud of their leadership in being the sole person to stand out on it. There are other times we wonder why they didn't vote with the "right side".

And in the past Kerry did good things in investigating BCCI. Feingold also was a civil rights champion earlier too when he was one of only a few senators to vote against the Communications Decency Act along with the Telecommunications Act, which Clinton SHOULD have vetoed. That telecommunications act is also what we are paying for today with all of the media consolidations and the resultant News Corps, Sinclair Broadcasting, GE, Clear Channels, etc. spoonfeeding us our information in their manipulative ways.

Let's focusing more on rewarding the ones that do stand up at times, and encourage them to do it more, so that they don't feel like they have to "measure" how many times they stand out so that they don't show up as some "communist" in some RW'ers voting guide.

[WildEyedLiberal]

37. Kick for these courageous Dems

:kick:

[IrishBloodEngHeart]

38. Kerry needs to publically support the censure

[lillilbigone]

39. Well, he does.

:shrug:

[IrishBloodEngHeart]

41. last i heard his staff said he did, but he said he was still studying it

do you have a quote or link? Thanks.