View Story | 359 comments
Comments: Expand Shrink Hide (Always) | Indented Flat (Always)
And a rec for that petition?
The Seminal :: Independent Media and Politics - Good for your soul...or something.
by fatbyjhnsn on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 12:12:00 PM PDT
I'm shocked at the number of Dems who voted against stripping that amendment. Just shocked.
"The jobs are never coming back, the illegals are never going home, but we're gonna have a lot more wars." -Pat Buchanan on John McCain
by turneresq on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 12:25:03 PM PDT
[ Parent ]
This is all a bunch of BS. What a way to be represented.
by BoiseBlue on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 12:27:40 PM PDT
Go Barack Obama
by concerned on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 05:11:35 PM PDT
god damn her worthless sell out hide. Our electoral system is broken. the 2-party system isn't working, hasn't worked, and will certainly not work in the future.
The Repubs know how to be an Opposition Party. Too bad the Dems, or at least those who voted to give immunity to ATT & Verizon, are not interested in the least in playing their supposed roles -- whether it be representing one's constituents and reflecting their views and priorities -- or whether in a more general way providing checks and balances to uphold the intent and letter of the U.S. Constitution.
I would love it if we could pull Feinstein out right now with a helicopter extraction tool, and just drop down in her place the great Oakland, CA Representative Barbara Lee. She would, as a person of high integrity, at minimum represent her constituents, and beyond that she would be a true leader -- not a suck up to the power machinery of corporate America.
Did I fail to say I loathe Feinstein and would like to see her removed from the entire equation?
_ it's now a fight to the finish>> Dean progressives v. Clinton centrists.
by rhfactor on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 08:36:02 PM PDT
.... I was holding off doing so because I was waiting for the g.e. since I am voting Democratic in the Fall regardless, but I went ahead and sent the Obama campaign some money and my gratitude.
He took the right stand today.
Dodd for Majority Leader...!
Like the nominee, don't like the nominee... Our nominee is still better than John McCain.
by Jen K in FLA on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 12:28:18 PM PDT
It's hard not to see that as a signal...
by fatbyjhnsn on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 12:29:27 PM PDT
.... and that guy has been MIA for most of the important votes all year!
Not to bash at all, but has the Clinton camp come out with any sort of explanation for her absence?
by Jen K in FLA on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 12:30:55 PM PDT
and didn't even show up for the stimulus bill! It was important for someone!
by fatbyjhnsn on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 12:33:26 PM PDT
and with Obama's YES vote, we will run him out of town
by Great Uncle Bulgaria on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 02:50:14 PM PDT
by Great Uncle Bulgaria on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 02:50:38 PM PDT
This vote by Obama shows something important about him. And it's not what his vote was.
He failed to vote on the Iran resolution, Hillary did. He stated that he would have voted against it. Hillary voted for it.
BUT, he also stated, "I shouldn't have missed that vote, it was a mistake".
Now, he is showing us that he can learn a lesson, and not repeat the same mistake more than once.
Kudos. As well as for voting against immunity.
More States, More Delegates, More Popular Votes, More Experience, More Judgment. Obama = More.
by pvlb on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 02:27:54 PM PDT
Let it be said in Hillary's defense that by not showing up, she effectively voted NO. On many occasions the Hillary supporters here claim that Obama's absence from a vote where he'd vote NO, even if he took a public position, was a serious character defect. In these comments, I've refuted such stupid assertions as off-base: what's important is that we have a public stand on the issue. So, here I do the same. It's nice that Obama showed up to vote, but he didn't have to, it is very OK that Clinton didn't show up to vote and chose to campaign instead.
However. In those NO/ABSENT votes where I've given Obama a free pass, he made his position clear. So, what I charge, and in public, and while other people have a chance to cast their ballots is:
Does Hillary Clinton Support Telecom Amnesty: YES or NO.
by Great Uncle Bulgaria on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 02:49:13 PM PDT
When Sen. Clinton is absent from a vote it means no. Therefore she is against Telecom amnesty. But when Sen. Obama, in a coordinated effort to help fellow dems, and to block anti-abortion votes, registers as 'present', he's not supporting women's right to choose.
How many ways does Sen. Clinton get to have it?
by pvlb on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 03:17:41 PM PDT
coordinate her absence with the groups trying to defeat telecom immunity, as a way of protecting more vulnerable Senators?
Because that was the meaning of Obama's "present" votes in the IL legislature on choice. That is a well-known fact. To represent those votes as anything else is dishonest.
by Big River Bandido on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 05:27:27 PM PDT
if you're not even going to bother to show up and vote for it?
by fool mee once on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 03:41:45 PM PDT
The amendment was to get rid of immunity. Absence is closer to opposing the amendment (bad) than to supporting it (good).
Hillary was AWOL. This is unforgivable.
-5.63, -8.10 | Impeach, Convict, Remove & Bar from Office, Arrest, Indict, Convict, Imprison!
by neroden on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 05:27:11 PM PDT
on something this critical? nowhere to be found?
America as a functioning representative democracy is no longer the case. There was hope after Nov 2006 midterms. Then Reid & Pelosi showed us how to squander every single chip on our side of the table. Yet there were still the Presidential Candidates who maybe would signal to us, directly or indirectly, that the systematic hollowing out and destruction of the checks and balances of the American system would be dealt with -- and severely.
but no, not a whimper. Change! Experience!
To me, this whole FISA Bill has been the final litmus test for whether or not we have a functioning representative government. When Reid set up Dodd to fail in Oct-Nov 07 -- on the very same day that Pelosi publicly besmirched and scolded Pete Stark for having the audacity to call out the President for his lack of humanity -- that to me was the final blow.
I believe that was the final mark of whether or not America could & would salvage all that has been good about our system of government. Thus, the January re-run of the late 2007 first roll-over to give Bush his immunity, for me was destined to end the same way.
Shameful beyond all measure.
So, in my view, anyone who did not fight to deny retroactive immunity to ATT & Verizon has no fight in them for the interests of America.
by rhfactor on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 08:47:52 PM PDT
Rooibos!!! -6.12, -6.10
by lns1122 on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 07:11:40 PM PDT
Dodd for vice-president.
by Gareth on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 12:34:17 PM PDT
Is a more powerful platform than VP.
Harry has got to go!
This is CLASS WAR, and the other side is winning.
by Mr X on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 12:35:46 PM PDT
can you imagine a democrat with an actual spine in leadership of the senate...?
-4.50, -4.92; Obama '08
by RSA TX on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 12:38:22 PM PDT
is not the problem. Harry Reid has a spine. He's doing a fine job of getting what he wants.
Please, read, rec, comment on my Diary today and help out if you can! Monday is My Birthday
by Sagebrush Bob on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 12:53:16 PM PDT
I recall high school and reading the Canterbury Tales: The Pardoner's Tale.
First he tells you how he's going to fleece you, then he fleeces you, then he explains how he fleeced you.
Harry Reid is and has been a sham from day 1. When and how do such votes for Majority Leader take place? Is there a process for ousting Reid?
Wait I forgot. As so many here have reminded constantly, the Dem senators are not going to remove him. Time and time again they demonstrate they are perfectly fine with him.
We do not have leaders representing progressive America. You know, I am reminded of "No Taxation Without Representation". Where's Ours?
I live in one of the most liberal cities in the entire world, SF, and it's home to Pelosi and Feinstein. Is that not pathetic? And remember this as well: The entire ATT spying operation was discovered where, of all places? In the heart of San Francisco.. pelosi and Feinstein turf.
Makes you wonder, doesn't it, hmm, wonder if they were actually consulted and they gave their approval by having no disapproval of this entire NSA spy operation -- in the most liberal American City. Hmph, how bout that.
by rhfactor on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 08:55:39 PM PDT
But today, Fuck Harry Reid. And the horse he rode in on.
Many people did not care for Pat Buchanan's speech; it probably sounded better in the original German."
by Flippant on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 02:02:08 PM PDT
http://www.fuckyoureid.com
Any ideas?
by fatbyjhnsn on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 02:10:32 PM PDT
Hi Jason, I'd just let it lapse...
by Great Uncle Bulgaria on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 02:54:12 PM PDT
But yeah, might let it lapse...
by fatbyjhnsn on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 03:12:39 PM PDT
No I can't imagine anything of the sort. Sad isn't it??
Random chance suggests that sometime some Dems are going to stand for something. If or when that happens, I hope someone is left who notices.
by keepinon on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 02:08:06 PM PDT
The way Harry Reid has pretended to be against telcom amnesty while singlehandedly making it inevitable with his choice of underlying bill just makes me sick.
by UU VIEW on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 12:47:36 PM PDT
Check the roll call.
Yes, I thought I needed new glasses, too. He voted with Dodd.
Reid actually voted with Dodd. It bears repeating:
Reid voted with Dodd to strike the amnesty provision from the bill.
Maybe his support was too little, too late, but that's the way he voted. Much as I can't believe my eyes.
by unwillingsuburbanite on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 04:51:04 PM PDT
The Judiciary Committee version of the bill had no telecom immunity. Reid used his power as floor leader to bring the disgusting Intelligence Committee bill to the floor. It was congressional disingenuousness at its worst.
Reid has been an utter disgrace.
by Big River Bandido on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 05:31:02 PM PDT
My bad. I don't know enough of the history of the process.
by unwillingsuburbanite on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 06:20:52 PM PDT
you are part of the progressive crowd. If YOU didn't know, then establishment Dems sure don't pay attention, then beyond that layer, ordinary Americans watching the evening news? They don't have the first clue about all those machiavellian machinations that control the fate of legislation in America.
just sayin --- This happens in broad daylight, and lah-dee-dah, America by and large has no earthly idea what just went on today.
by rhfactor on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 08:59:19 PM PDT
by Big River Bandido on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 10:14:54 PM PDT
I was even paying some (though limited) attention to this issue.
Part of the trouble is that so much of legislating involves so many arcane rules and practices that even someone like me (master's degree, liberal arts education, reads news, reads news blogs) has a hard time following what the hell is going on.
I'm sure most Americans think it just boils down to who voted how on what, and I'm sure most legislators want it to stay that way; that way, they can run on their "record," as no doubt Harry Reid will. (During an election, what opponent would try to explain "cloture?")
The trouble is that politics is a specialty, with a specialized, arcane language. How can ordinary citizens, armed with little more than a joke of a 7th-grade civics course, expect to follow what goes on? I've even been paying attention.
Thank you all for continuing to interpret and disseminate, and keep an eye on these people.
by unwillingsuburbanite on Wed Feb 13, 2008 at 06:02:46 AM PDT
what a careful watch we must keep on the hacks in the Democratic Senate caucus. They'll whisper "I love you, I love you", but all the while they're thinking "fuck you, fuck you".
by Big River Bandido on Wed Feb 13, 2008 at 01:30:23 AM PDT
That's 71 rec's. 71 of you don't check sources. Go look at the roll call.
I didn't believe my eyes, either. But there it is: Reid voted against amnesty.
by unwillingsuburbanite on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 05:00:20 PM PDT
and used his power as majority leader to vote another. Guess which method had more power and influence?
by Big River Bandido on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 05:31:38 PM PDT
lets talk it up. lets make it happen. Sen Dodd wanted the position last time. Lets make sure he gets it next congressional session. Imagine Obama in the white house and dodd as majority leader. you want change? this combination will give us an FDR revolution. SEN. DODD FOR MAJORITY LEADER!
by windwardguy46 on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 06:34:44 PM PDT
knows the rules and procedures actually walk through the process for us -- so that maybe instead of talking up Dodd in an Orange blog, we could instead leverage our power as hundreds of thousands of citizens -- and do something more directly meaningful that would put this cause into motion.
I know KagroX would know what the rules are and how one works the rules to potentially let that be so.
It would be nice if we could actually parlay our sentiments into an actionable plan.
Anyone happen to notice how a group called Anonymous is actually doing something more than emailing their representatives about the Cult Church of Scientology. It's a massive effort -- way beyond keyboard tapping.
but it starts with an actual gameplan. I don;t know that system. but someone here does.
by rhfactor on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 09:04:48 PM PDT
majority leader. It's an insider caucus thing. I've heard aides say that's the only decision they won't advise their boss on.
by fatbyjhnsn on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 09:12:20 PM PDT
I appreciate the answer....
by rhfactor on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 09:33:16 PM PDT
Senator Dodd as Majority Leader, Senator Reid holds that position and doesn't seem willing to let go any time soon. Also, if Senator Obama wins the White House, he will need Senator Clinton's active support to get it. What greater motivator for her than supporting her bid for Majority Leader? Great plan, if Harry goes along with it!
For every difficult question, there is an answer that is simple, easily understood and wrong.--H.L. Mencken
by The Totalizer on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 11:05:52 PM PDT
A Vice-President should not be so powerful, and 8 years of this "Fourth Branch of Government" crud is more than enough. The next President ought to reestablish restraint on the role of the Vice-President, and that should not happen to Dodd.
by sesquioxide on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 01:43:23 PM PDT
...if more senators had the guts and integrity to oppose this, they wouldn't have waited this long to do so.
"Mission Accomplished" -7.62, -6.36
by wiscmass on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 12:45:34 PM PDT
I'm certainly not. This is what I now expect from Democrats.
The 2008 Democratic Presidential Ticket: Barack Obama, President; Ray Mabus, Vice President. *** Change, Reform, Competency, Expertise.
by simca on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 12:47:51 PM PDT
dolphin777
by dolphin777 on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 02:18:31 PM PDT
I'm shocked at the number of Dems who voted against stripping that amendment.
Wish I could say the same. I'm not shocked at all.
by Sagebrush Bob on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 12:51:29 PM PDT
Eighteen Dems voted for corporate interests. They are Bayh, Inouye, Johnson, Landrieu, McCaskill, Ben Nelson, Bill Nelson, Stabenow, Feinstein, Kohl, Pryor, Rockefeller, Salazar, Carper, Mikulski, Conrad, Webb, and Lincoln (plus Joe Lieberman). Hillary Clinton missed the vote. Barack Obama did not, and he voted against retroactive immunity.
Eighteen Dems voted for corporate interests. They are Bayh, Inouye, Johnson, Landrieu, McCaskill, Ben Nelson, Bill Nelson, Stabenow, Feinstein, Kohl, Pryor, Rockefeller, Salazar, Carper, Mikulski, Conrad, Webb, and Lincoln (plus Joe Lieberman).
Hillary Clinton missed the vote. Barack Obama did not, and he voted against retroactive immunity.
And here's the roll call
May your entire existence be one sensuous, frolic-filled experience lived in defiance of care.
by Fonsia on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 01:08:01 PM PDT
Calling Joe Nation-How bout a Senate run Joe?
"I said, 'wait a minute, Chester, you know I'm a peaceful man'". Robbie Robertson
by NearlyNormal on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 01:19:59 PM PDT
during the first Judicial Committee hearing on the wiretapping with Gonzales in the hotseat. Ohhh, the indignation she showed!
I guess she was just pissed because he wouldn't reveal the extent of the wiretapping. Now that she knows, well,like-hey, it's all A-OK!
by goodasgold on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 06:05:57 PM PDT
.... That looks like a DLC Christmas card list to me... Did they organize something on this?
by Jen K in FLA on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 01:32:33 PM PDT
The DLC movement has to end. I really think a vote for Obama might really help in his regard. Bayh will probably be Hillary's running mate. Man, I am so frustrated at this vote. Damn it.
"John McCain's platform, and it certainly looks inviting for the Fall: he has promised less jobs and more wars" - Former Republican Congressman Joe Scarborough
by marcusdean on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 01:45:25 PM PDT
What I find funny is the names of two senators that DailyKos pushed pretty hard. I think Kos needs to update the mission of this blog because just look at the ire these Senators have created here. Giving Bush the legitimacy he needs to say this was a bipartisan bill will really come back to haunt Democrats later... Why not push for progressive candidates who will do the right thing without bring pressured? Screw relying on Democrats to do what is right because it seems on the important votes our confidence is off base!
by cardboardurinal on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 01:47:18 PM PDT
I'd be willing to bet a big part of the reason for these lousy Dems doing this is because Bush and the other Fingerlicans are threatening them. What is FISA actually being used for? For the GWOT? No. To spy on democrats, lawyers, anyone that even stands a chance to take down Bush and his pathetic crew. While it's not shocking these DNC-Republican Lite schmucks voted this way, they might have had a spine if there weren't mobsters from the WH forcing their hands.
by Punditcrat on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 01:48:48 PM PDT
and that's all they care about.
Fuck principles, fuck the Constitution, and fuck the American people who cherish their privacy, because I want to keep my job. Some republican in the future may drag this into the light and say I was weak on terror, and we just can't have that.
That's all they care about and the first person to prove me wrong, I'll give you a cool million.
"In political discussion heat is in inverse proportion to knowledge." J. G. C. Minchin
by LucyMO on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 01:58:11 PM PDT
2 years now... That if we only KNEW how the Bushies had threatened Pelosi & Company with something outrageous -- we would then understand how she made a deal to keep impeachment off the table, and see, she's really scared actually, and if we only knew what secret she's guarding, and how she's really doing all this for us, but we just don't know it....
Punditcract, this isn't directed at you. It's more of my having "excuse fatigue" for why Pelosi/Bush Democrats behave the way they do.
When in reality the Bush Democrats are just pathetic little clingers-on who want their jobs at all costs.
by rhfactor on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 09:10:18 PM PDT
As far as Pelosi, I think I get that one. Remember how BushCo. finally admitted to torturing KSM and 2 other detainees last week? They did it on Super Tuesday so no one would notice, but that basically gave us enough information to put the pieces together. Bush and the Attorney General had to sign off on that torture, and they did so in 2002-2003, and probably many more times since. When they signed off they had to let Congress know, and the handful of people that knew about torture does include Pelosi. So, in 2002 when the masses weren't even aware of torture, she was. But big surprise--she did NOTHING to stop it from happening. Fast forward about 4 years to when she becomes Speaker. Conveniently, the torture issue started to surface in MSM stories around that time. How would it really look for the brand new, first-ever female Speaker of the House to have basically signed off on Bush's torture games? Naturally, Bush threatened that if she and her little Democrat party in Congress tried to impeach him, he'd take her down with him. If you ask me, we would've been better off with that...at least we'd know everyone's true colors and stop playing nice-nice with these whack jobs.
by Punditcrat on Wed Feb 13, 2008 at 05:07:28 AM PDT
articulation of a very plausible scenario -- so plausible that it immediately rises to the very top of my possible explanations LIST for Madame Decider's very unAmerican behaviors since taking over as Speaker.
Have you expressed that scenario elsewhere? I have never seen anyone present the case as you have. I think it is something that deserves having serious attention.
thanks for posting it.
rh+
by rhfactor on Wed Feb 13, 2008 at 08:36:45 PM PDT
I don't personally care for McCaskill, but I know she has been fiercly promoting Obama. Does anyone have any insight into this connection? Obviously, I'm disappointed in her voting record on this issue.
by cameoanne on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 02:06:34 PM PDT
What the hell? Why bother electing her when she's going to vote the same as Talent did?
This probably has to do with the fact that Sprint is a Kansas City area company with a lot of economic clout. Which means she is either votes with the highest bidder, or else she's a fucking coward. Neither recommends her to hold office.
"YOPP!" --Horton Hears a Who
by Reepicheep on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 02:41:24 PM PDT
are frankly terrified of what a Hillary nomination will do to their downticket candidates.
by Fonsia on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 05:14:06 PM PDT
by dolphin777 on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 02:19:26 PM PDT
It looks familiar somehow...could those be the same Dems who ALWAYS vote with the fascists against the people?
During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act. - George Orwell
by kyril on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 03:15:19 PM PDT
I somehow missed Webb on the first read-through. That fucking pisses me off. WTF, Webb?
by kyril on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 03:16:49 PM PDT
Moral of the Story?
Don't for a Democrat when he or she's going to vote on critical issues like a Republican.
In future, no matter what the dKos mission is, I will not vote for any candidate who is not a progressive. And that will sometimes mean abstaining from a vote.
It's a politician's JOB to convince me to vote for him or her. Not the other way around. If I'm not sold, I don't have to vote for said representative because that person will not represent me anyhow.
Thank god I don't live in Webb's state.
Been wiretapped lately?
by m00nchild on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 04:34:31 PM PDT
not simply elect Democrats, but to elect Democrats who support and embody reform of the party. Presumably that means "reform away from DLC Centrists and toward Progressives".
That is why the whole cackle of voices supporting a non-progressive, using THIS site to do so, is actually anathema to the Mission of this site.
Oh but what the hell, they drive a lot of advertising dollars with all those diaries and eyeballs.
by rhfactor on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 09:13:38 PM PDT
but I'd be lying if I did.
If there is one thing I'm not shocked about when it comes to my junior Senator, it's when she sticks a shiv in my back on the votes I really care about.
"It is through disobedience that progress has been made, through disobedience and through rebellion." Oscar Wilde, 1891
by MichiganGirl on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 12:52:26 PM PDT
My Senators are Reid and Ensign!
:gags:
by Sagebrush Bob on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 01:10:55 PM PDT
are in a position to do something about Reid. For the sake of our country, please do.
by Big River Bandido on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 05:34:14 PM PDT
by other72384 on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 01:16:03 PM PDT
by Sagebrush Bob on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 01:33:29 PM PDT
by The Totalizer on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 11:11:57 PM PDT
Shocked. Shocked, I tell you.
Greed makes a really shitty foundation for a civilization to build itself upon.
by Red Bean on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 01:31:31 PM PDT
that the Dems would vote this way. I'm joking - I'm not surprised at all. What I AM surprised at is the number that actually voted against retroactive immunity.
Sorry, but given our (meaning Dems) history on this and so much else, the news is not that we voted like idiots. That's to be expected. Rather, the news is that some of us actually voted the right way.
Yeah, I'm cynical. With Dems like these, who needs Republicans?
Rise like lions after slumber in unvanquishable number. Shake your chains to earth like dew, which in sleep had fallen on you. Ye are many - they are few.
by cruz on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 02:20:53 PM PDT
I'm disgusted, but not shocked, given the number of cowardly Democrats in the Congress, who get put there by truly ignorant voters.
Stop bitching and start a revolution!
by Randian on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 02:45:09 PM PDT
dems who would rather protect mr. 30% than the rights of the American people. WTF is going on? Dems should be stepping on the criministrations throat on EVERYTHING.Impeach already. This is unforgivable. Even Diane didn't bend over on this one. Of course me and about a million others have been bombarding her inbox with don't you dare emails.
Whitehouse voted to protect bush too. What the hell was that about. I am truly weeping over our loss of Constitutional rights and strong Democratic leadership.
by mpc 12 on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 04:12:48 PM PDT
The co-sponsors of the amendment to strip immunity need some "thank you" calls and letters.
Let them know we appreciate their efforts.
COSPONSORS(11): Sen Feingold, Russell D. [WI] - 1/24/2008 Sen Leahy, Patrick J. [VT] - 1/24/2008 Sen Kennedy, Edward M. [MA] - 1/24/2008 Sen Harkin, Tom [IA] - 1/24/2008 Sen Wyden, Ron [OR] - 1/24/2008 Sen Sanders, Bernard [VT] - 1/24/2008 Sen Obama, Barack [IL] - 1/24/2008 Sen Clinton, Hillary Rodham [NY] - 1/24/2008 Sen Biden, Joseph R., Jr.
COSPONSORS(11):
Sen Feingold, Russell D. [WI] - 1/24/2008 Sen Leahy, Patrick J. [VT] - 1/24/2008 Sen Kennedy, Edward M. [MA] - 1/24/2008 Sen Harkin, Tom [IA] - 1/24/2008 Sen Wyden, Ron [OR] - 1/24/2008 Sen Sanders, Bernard [VT] - 1/24/2008 Sen Obama, Barack [IL] - 1/24/2008 Sen Clinton, Hillary Rodham [NY] - 1/24/2008 Sen Biden, Joseph R., Jr.
