Bill being voted on now.

[beachmom]

We must be witnesses to this travesty.

[Mass]

1. Chafee NO

Which other GOPers will vote NO?

[Blaukraut]

4. if he were a deciding vote, it would have been 'yes'

guaranteed! He's another one of those fake moderate rethugs.

[WildEyedLiberal]

2. Where is everyone???

Like 30 people voted, WTF?

[Mass]

3. They will come. They have to come from their offices or whereever they

were when the vote was called.

[WildEyedLiberal]

5. Oh ok - I see them trickling in now - voting - DU frozen

STABENOW - AYE

NELSON (NE) - AYE

NELSON (FL) - AYE

ROCKEFELLER - AYE

LANDRIEU - AYE

PRYOR - AYE

MENENDEZ - AYE

SALAZAR - AYE

LAUTENBURG - AYE (WTF!!!!!!!!)



I feel SICK

[WildEyedLiberal]

7. delete dupe

[WildEyedLiberal]

9. delete dupe

Goddamn DU froze, sorry everyone

[karynnj]

6. Dem Ayes

Nelson, Nelson, Johnson, Rockfeller, Landrieu, Pryor, Menendez (!!!!!), Lautenberg(!!!!), Lieberman, Carper, Stabenow

At least it's clear why, they traded off filibustering. What is with my Senators????

[Blaukraut]

8. wtf? Why did those two vote aye??

I cannot believe they got 64 aye votes for this abomination.

[_dynamicdems]

11. No kidding. I just got home in time to watch this train wreck.

Horrible. A sad day for decency.

[Mass]

13. Add Pryor and Lieberman (of course).

[ProSense]

15. I hate them!

I despise them! They are traitors!

[beachmom]

10. Now I'm beginning to understand what Reid was up against

Has the world gone completely mad?

[Mass]

12. They try a filibuster on the Fence bill, but not on the Detainee bill?

:wtf:

[Blaukraut]

18. that's like bandaging a cut on a limb that was allowed to become

gangrenous. As a matter of fact, who gives a shit about a fence anymore? They sold us out on our rights, and now they're worried about a stupid fence?? Fuck the whole lot of them hard and sideways :mad:

[karynnj]

30. Worse Stephens wants money allocated for a campaign

to create advertising that would teach people how to use the V-Chip to control what their kids I hope someone asks if the V chip can be redesigned to have a code that lets you not see stories about the US torturing people.)

[sandnsea]

26. I agree

Four amendments to use against Republicans, especially considering what they contain, is a pretty good trade - all things considered. I thought we were doing better in the vote - 65 is nuts.

[beachmom]

14. D's that voted aye

Carper, Johnson, Landrieu, Lautenberg, Lieberman, Menendez, Nelson (Fla.), Nelson (Neb.), Pryor, Rockefeller, Salazar and Stabenow.



Guess the trashing of the Constitution was bipartisan.

[Mass]

16. Most of them for reelection in 06. It is 2002 all over again.

When will they learn? I guess it helped Cleland for to vote the IWR.

[WildEyedLiberal]

17. I think this makes it clear why there was no filibuster

Only 34 voted AGAINST it period - so that answers the question about finding 41 for cloture!

[Mass]

19. There were not 41 votes for Alito - sometimes you filibuster by principle

And there will not be 41 votes against cloture for the Fence Bill.

[WildEyedLiberal]

22. I guess I just don't see the point anymore

Either way it would have passed today, so there's really no benefit to filibustering when 41 can't even be bothered to vote against the final bill let alone cloture.

At least with Alito over 41 voted against his confirmation so theoretically filibuster could have succeeded. Here, it's obvious that too many Senators don't see anything wrong with abolishing habeus corpus and allowing torture.

[sandnsea]

27. We've got 4 amendments

That they voted against. There must be a few Republicans who can be hurt with those votes.

[karynnj]

20. Bipartisan - but the good guys were almost ALL Democrats

I honesty am amazed that Lautenberg and Menendez voted this way. Lautenberg is a Jewish WWII vet.

[WildEyedLiberal]

21. Was Chafee the only R who voted no?

[Blaukraut]

23. Snowe abstained, but yes, he was the only one n/t

[ProSense]

25. I'm sick to my stomach!

I was scheduled to go canvassing for Menendez in a week. No more! He's on his own. He has failed! I will vote Democratic to try to win back Congress, but beyond that, the hell with them! The Republicans would have had their bill because they have the votes. A vote for this bill is simply expressing agreement with its content! NJ is one of the bluest friggin states, there is no excuse! Fuck 'em!

[karynnj]

28. II think I will continue to canvass for Menendez, but am glad I

am not. Sunday night is the start of Yom Kippur. I don't even know if the prayer that weaves through most of the evening and the next day services has a line that asks forgiveness for condoning torture.

In a way I'm as sad as I was right after the election. In most elections, there is not a huge gap in moraity and goodness between the alternative candidates - this was a choice of good and evil.

[wisteria]

36. Menendez is trailing in his race and doesn't need something else

to try and defend before the election? Lautenberg?

[ProSense]

38. I don't think that's it!

Menendez is running an anti Bush campaign. Yesterday I received a letter from him about his support for Kerry's withdrawal plan. Bush isn't too popular around these parts, even Kean is pretending he's against Bush's policies. Lautenberg???

[Democrafty]

41. I don't get it, either.

He appears to oppose the war in Iraq for moral reasons. Why, then, vote for this? It just doesn't add up for me.

[beachmom]

24. I saw Senator Kerry on the floor for the vote

He voted, and then he stood solemnly, standing there for a little while, looking at the tally. He didn't really talk to anyone much. I looked away from the TV, and when I looked back he was gone.

I can't imagine how this makes him feel -- that such a dangerous bill would never have seen the light of day had he been president. Sometimes this stuff is just too much to take.

[karynnj]

29. This had to be enormously hard on him

Some of the people who voted yes are people he's known for years. I'm shocked so many Democrats voted for it.

[TayTay]

31. Karnnj and Prosense, I am so sorry for you

I thought Lautenburg and Menendez would vote against the rape of the Constitution, I really did. I am sorry beyond words that you saw this betrayal.

I just don't know what else to say at this point. This is one of the saddest days in the history of the Republic. I believe that Jefferson, Adams, Franklin and the rest of the Founders must be spinning in their graves at this incredible submission to Osama bin Laden. The cowardice revealed today is beyond anything I've seen in many years of watching Congress.

It will never be forgotten. We have seen something that is every bit as shameful, cowardly and despicable as anything in our past. Today, I am ashamed of Congress and embarrassed by these acts of dishonorable men and women.

[beachmom]

32. BTW, it was apt that that ignoramus racist scum Barfbag

read out the final vote. Apt because that 99% white group voted for a bill they figure will only affect brown people of another religion.

[karynnj]

33. People, I think he thinks of them as macacas

I agree - After 2004, some one commented that world wide, that America as a country was quilty for the sins of Bush. This takes it a step further, our legislature has now knowingly given Bush permission to torture. It bothers me that the country was so distracted that there wasn't even an uproar. Not from the liberal left, the religious communities, nowhere.

I do agree that the trio of Rep Senators created almost a stealth attack and you were right, as usual we were lolled into complacency. I do think that isolated Democrats were concerned - Kerry did speak on the over all issue nearly every day - and he genuinely was alone on this. (or maybe others got even less coverage) It's almost like we're in the Wizard of Oz field of poppies, it's hard to stay awake.

What concerns me is that the US may well have this as a burden for generations. Yeah, this was a fit bill for Allen to preside over. Good luck in eliminating him from the Senate.

[beachmom]

34. Unfortunately, Allen just put out an attack ad against Webb

I haven't seen it, but it's I think 3 women talking about how Webb hates women and is going to take away all their rights or whatever. From Raising Kaine, you find they're all 3 of them active Republicans. But on the more tell it like it is Not Larry Sabato blog, that guy thinks it's a devastating ad against Webb, and that Allen is gaining momentum again.

Pro or con, people are pretty damned stupid to believe ads. But, unfortunately, people are stupid.

Allen is literally attacking Webb from the left on women. A fucking joke on its face! And it's all based on the blackest of lies -- half truths: Webb's opposition to women in combat in 1979.

[TayTay]

35. Webb recanted what he wrote back then

on Meet The Press. Allan has not recanted and still pretends that he made up a hate word on the spot rather than apologize like a man.

BTW, as pointed out on Hardball tonight, if Allen can go back to the 70's for a smear, the Webb can go back to that time as well for valid looks at other hate words Allen has used. If it is fair to go back 30 years for one, it is fair for the other and Allen can't have it both ways.

[beachmom]

37. Here's the ad:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JNlGEkMaCqQ&eurl=

I don't know if it was THAT devastating. The women came across as a little bitchy to me. Allen is against a woman's right to choose. So this is a depress the voter turnout ad IMO.

Oh, and John McCain recorded an ad for Allen. How pathetic! The most hilarious line? "He works hard". Can you imagine someone having to point out that JK works hard?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N9zH85Anh70&NR


Allen has a TON of money and will flood the airwaves with this BS. Ugh.

[TayTay]

39. He works hard?????? That's it?

He works hard? That's McCain's praise for Barfbag. OMG, that is pathetic beyond words.

I suppose he does work hard. After all, he serves on 3 committees with my Senator and it's really difficult to smirk that much without practice. (I am still, parochially I guess, upset that that dumb friggin bastid sits in a committee and gets an equal vote with John Kerry. It is living, breathing proof that life is unfair. Barfie is not fit to shine Kerry's shoes, never mind debate him in Foreign Relations, Commerce and Small Business. )

He works hard???? Dear Lord, isn't that a given? Which pols don't work hard? Of course it's easier if you have a brain and have something upstairs to work with and I understand that Allen is in Senate-Special Ed classes to catch up, but still. Geez, that's awful. I would die if my Senator ran an ad from someone claiming as the highest praise, 'he works hard.' So do I and I'm not fit to have a seat in the United States Senate. He's not fit for that either.

[wisteria]

40. McCain has a way with words doesn't he? N/T

[WildEyedLiberal]

42. Treachery explained: MSN article

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15049251

Brown explained his vote this way in an interview with MSNBC.com Thursday: "Unlike Mike DeWine, I'm willing to stand up to my party when they're wrong."

He said the detainees "are not soldiers, not combatants representing a government, these are terrorists."

He added, "I supported a compromise because I think John McCain, a former prisoner of war, understands what we need to do to ensure our soldiers are safe."

........

Asked what persuaded him to vote for the bill, Menendez said, "In view of the fact that the (Supreme) Court has ruled the existing process unconstitutional, it leaves us without anything. It seems to me while it is not the bill I wanted — as evidenced by the way I voted on the amendments — I think there has to be a process in place. I wouldn't want those who have committed acts of terrorism to ultimately find the ability to be free by virtue of a lack of a (tribunal) process."

Also in the article: Chuck Schumer explains that it was okay for Dems to vote no because "We’ve polled this extensively” and he argued that detainees and tribunals “are secondary issues to most people.” That's right: not because torture is wrong, not because America values human rights and basic legal principles such as habeus corpus, but because it's "polling well."

I swear :banghead: to God :banghead: if it weren't for John Kerry :banghead: I would give up. :banghead:

[Mass]

43. This is a good illustration of why I dont like Schumer.

Even if they did tha, why brag about it? Rove is already saying Democrats would govern with polls, why prove they are right?

[karynnj]

44. Not to mention the response is unconsciencable

implying as it does that, had it polled as an important issue and if the American people agreed, he wouldn't have voted against it. The fact is there was no attempt to convince people on this. Partially there wasn't time.

Beachmom was right that trusting Warner, Graham, and McCain left them having to vote on an unacceptable bill that they knew the details of only about 3 days before - and which was still being revised almost up to the day before the vote. If this were all planned in advance, it was a pretty diabolical scheme. Questioning, much less opposing the three Republicans, even in the final days would have been a landmind. They were, after all, the ones bravely "standing up to Bush" and trying to negotiate a better bill AND they were still changing stuff "to fix problem".

I have less problem with Menendez's answer, though it is wrong. There were two issues: the courts and torture. If the bill was defeated, it could be changed and resubmitted. This is where it was like IWR, except the IWR was somewhat more believable.

[TayTay]

45. This tells us why the issue was never defined for Dems

and why they never talked about it much until last weekend. The Powers That Be in the Dem Party didn't want it talked about and didn't want a national debate on it. They did everything they could to not make it an issue and not call attention to it.

Reading this tells me that there was never going to be a filibuster and no stand on principle would have been allowed. I think this was strategy from the beginning, Schumer's comments tell me that.

[ProSense]

49. Exactly!

They sold us, not the left, but all Americans, they sold us out! Saying after the fact that the best we can do is compromise basic human rights, morals and American values in a blitz to push a horrendous bill through is a stab in the back of democracy! These trials were simply not that urgent. Getting a bill to Bush is not the priority, protecting human rights is --- no compromising on humane treatment!

[beachmom]

50. I hate to say I was right, but I was right!!!!

I KNEW there was something up when Kerry didn't condemn Bush's bill when it came out. Now mind you, he was being a team player. We know that if he had rebelled at that stage, there would have been another Adam Nagorney article in the NYT about how JK is so "embarrassing" to Dems, and how Dems are divided. And since Schumer is in charge of the DSCC (a job Kerry had some years back), he felt he had to defer to Schumer's strategy. No way people were going to point to Kerry for losing the election in '06 if things didn't go our way.

But maybe you had a point, Tay Tay, when Kerry kept saying "We do not torture. Period". There was a little subliminal messaging in there, because it was such strong language.

This is why I want Kerry in the Executive Office. Because then he doesn't have to be forced into such a horrible situation of deferring to a bunch of self serving, gutless, unprincipled, swarmy career politicians like Schumer and the lot of them who either voted against the bill or who didn't want to "rock the boat" (I bet you Hillary was one of them). Being asked to stay mum about the worst bill to come out since the Alien and Seditions Act has got to hurt in so many ways.

[ProSense]

46. I think they are all full of it!

The tribunal process argument is full of shit! The JAGs have said they could be modeled after court martials. The military lawyers all spoke out against this. "We need to try people" is not an excuse for condoning torture. The bill addresses two issue: torture and trials, which aren't so friggin urgent that we have to compromise everything we stand for. Speeding up a trial is not an excuse for condoning torture.

[wisteria]

51. It was all politics-no soul searching,no guilt, just politics that ruled

the day. You would have though the votes for the IWR, would have taught them something. Some issues are too important to let polls and politics rule the day. This is a circumstance when our people are as bad as their people.
And Schumer, I haven't had a good opinion of him for some time now. he strikes me as being a greedy little weasel.I don't even think he considers right and wrong, it's all just politics for him.

[karynnj]

47. Does Biden have a clue?

He was on Imus and did a good job explaining the Habeus Corpus problem, the reason he voted against the bill. He then praised McCain for having made the bill less horendous. (Note: not even the 3 Republicans, just McCain!) Also the praise was NOT in response to Imus asking what he thought about McCain. Biden also said he was running ... again.

[Mass]

48. Unity 08? Even recently, Biden has been saying he would be honored

to be McCain's running mate, so, no, I do not think he has a clue, but, unfortunately, neither have Levin or Reid, and they do not even have the excuse of running for president.

[karynnj]

55. The real question is what would Biden bring to that ticket?

I can't think of anything. McCain himself has appeal to independents. McCain may have a higher approval of Democrats than Biden. Republicans somewhat distrust McCain, picking a Democrat would make no sense.

[whometense]

52. Ben Nelson quote in Salon

The lead line is "Does Nebraska actually need its own senator?"

http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2006/09/29/nelson/index.html

A Democrat explains his detainee vote: I just follow McCain's lead

There's sad and then there's pathetic. In the course of voting for the Bush administration's detainee bill Thursday, Nebraska Sen. (Ben) Nelson crossed that line.

How could a Democrat -- let alone 12 of them -- vote for legislation that denies people we hold in custody even the basic right of challenging their custody in federal court? Nelson, who's running for reelection in a red state but still leads his Republican challenger by 23 percentage points, said he just follows the lead of John McCain:

"I think people respect Sen. McCain on these issues," Nelson tells the New York Times, "and I think he probably represents the views of a lot of people in Nebraska."

-- Tim Grieve

[Mass]

53. I think this was the major error the Dems made. Following McCain's lead!

Sure, people like Reid and Levin did not follow it to the end, but they surrendered their moral authority to him, and therefore weakened their positions when it came to have a strong position against the bill.

After having said for days that McCain was great (as as late as yesterday in their closing statement), it is difficult for them to criticize the bill as strongly as Leahy or Kerry could. Nelson is just going to the end of this logic, and while I disagree with his result, his position is unfortunately a lot more solid than Reid's here. He trusts McCain and follows his lead. Reid trusts McCain and votes against its lead.

One lesson to be learned about this. Democrats cannot afford to let "maverick" Republicans fight their battles for them. It does not work: McCain, Warner, and Specter are the best examples of that.

[karynnj]

54. I agree,

I'm not sure what they could have done, if they had worked on their own bill- even consulting with the "so called renegade Republicans", it would have lost on a party line vote. The "compromise" with the Democratic amendments was likely the best they could hope for - though I would then still hope they would vote against the bill even with the amendments. (In fact, if Biden is not unique, the habeus Corpus amendment passing might have led to even fewer people voting against a bill that would still allow torture.)

[Mass]

56. I think this is another of these cases where the Senate Democratic

Leadership surrendered to consultants who were telling them to avoid national security issues because it was Bush's strong point. I think that it is why they let McCain negotiate for them.

However, I continue to think it is a terrible idea and I think that people like Kerry and Feingold must speak loud against that as soon as the election is finished. Whether we win this election or not, it is a losing proposition.

Read the Atlantic editorial KG has posted, if you did not already. It is an amazing tribute to Kerry from the editor, after his speech yesterday. He is gaining a huge legitimity on these issues (and the good thing is that Feingold as well is trying to get some legitimacy without compromising his principles).

http://blog.thedemocraticdaily.com/?p=4318#more-4318

http://www.twincities.com/mld/pioneerpress/news/local/15634391.htm

[whometense]

58. I agree - my reaction

to reading this was this: :banghead: :banghead:

Why would any moron just follow ANYONE else's lead on ANY bill?? My god. Does he not have a brain he can use to figure his votes out for himself? And as a democrat, if he insist on being brain dead, couldn't he instead follow the lead of a fellow DEMOCRAT?

Good lord.

[Inuca]

57. :-(

Nothing much to add to the discussion, just felt the need to share my frustration and sadness... I followed the best I could what happened yesterday, even got back early from work to be able to better follow in the afternoon. Leahy's speech at the end brought tears to my eyes... Seeing Lautenberg and a few others vote aye almost did the same. And I keep wondering why we can't switch Ben Nelson for Chafee... Horribly depressing, just plain unbelievable. A pathetic disgusting "farce", as Leahy so well characterized it at some point... Any shoulder available for a good cry? Damn' immoral idiots (almost) all of them!