Blue America Thanks Some Of The Patriots Who Stood Up For The Constitution

Yesterday the Blue America PAC started running a series of full page newspaper ads in GA-12, alerting John Barrow's constituents that although he campaigns as a Democrat in Savannah, Vidalia, Augusta, Milledgeville, and Statesboro, when he's back Inside the Beltway, he's been the single most dependable Democrat for George Bush and Dick Cheney and for the big money corporations looking for money-grubbing congressmen who will vote for their special interests. The week before that, the Blue America PAC took out a full page ad in the Washington Post and in every newspaper in Steny Hoyer's Maryland district, making sure his constituents knew about his shameful and decisive role in getting Bush's anti-constitutional FISA bill passed.

But over the last few days the Blue America bloggers, Digby, Jane, John and myself -- plus our colleague Glenn -- were mightily impressed by the courageous battle some members of the House and Senate and some candidates for the House and Senate, have waged against overwhelming odds and a sense of gruesome Insider inevitability. We decided that on behalf of the 5,969 donors who contributed $345,395.81 in the last few weeks we would pick a dozen and make symbolic contributions as tokens of gratitude to their campaign funds.

The first names to pop up, of course, where Chris Dodd and Russ Feingold, the heart, soul and conscience of the Senate. Listen to Chris Dodd make his last ditch plea to the Senate yesterday. And take a look at excerpts from Russ Feingold's speech:

"...it could not be clearer that this program broke the law, and this President broke the law. Not only that, but this administration affirmatively misled Congress and the American people about it for years before it finally became public."

...

"If Congress short-circuits these lawsuits, we will have lost a prime opportunity to finally achieve accountability for these years of law-breaking. That's why the administration has been fighting so hard for this immunity. It knows that the cases that have been brought directly against the government face much more difficult procedural barriers, and are unlikely to result in rulings on the merits."

...

"I sit on the Intelligence and Judiciary Committees, and I am one of the few members of this body who has been fully briefed on the warrantless wiretapping program. And, based on what I know, I can promise that if more information is declassified about the program in the future, as is likely to happen either due to the Inspector General report, the election of a new President, or simply the passage of time, members of this body will regret that we passed this legislation. I am also familiar with the collection activities that have been conducted under the Protect America Act and will continue under this bill. I invite any of my colleagues who wish to know more about those activities to come speak to me in a classified setting. Publicly, all I can say is that I have serious concerns about how those activities may have impacted the civil liberties of Americans. If we grant these new powers to the government and the effects become known to the American people, we will realize what a mistake it was, of that I am sure."

Those two were the easy ones because they were on the front line of the Senate every step of the way. It took us hours of e-mails and phone conversations to come up with the other 8, not because there weren't eight worthy progressives and patriots but because there dozens of them. It was painful narrowing them list down to just 8. Let me run down the list and give you a bit of rationale for each:

Rep. Tom Allen (D-ME) was elected to the House on the same day that Susan Collins was first elected to the Senate. Collins, a reflexive Bush rubber stamp, was a big booster of warrantless wiretaps and retroactive immunity. We don't think it's a coincidence that only 2 senators not running for president received bigger donations from the telecoms than Collins. In 2008, her campaign chest has swelled by over $35,000 with telecom money while she was working diligently to grant them everything they wanted. (She's taken $87,621 from them since being elected.) Tom voted against warrantless wiretaps and against retroactive immunity despite pressure from powerful Democratic Party hacks Steny Hoyer and Rahm Emanuel. Tom didn't care about the telecoms contributions or about party leaders manipulations. He stood for principles that cannot be compromised. "I strongly oppose retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies," he told us. "Neither the government nor large corporations are above the law. Individuals and corporations that break the law must be held accountable." Bingo.

Rep. Tom Udall (D-NM) has a somewhat similar story. He's running for the U.S. Senate seat being vacated by Pete Domenici, who voted in favor of wiretapping U.S. citizens. Worse yet, the right-wing extremist Tom must face in November, Congressman Steve Pearce, is equating giving his corporate donors immunity from Justice with national security. Although Tom's Colorado cousin, Mark Udall, buckled under right-wing pressure, Tom stood firm. This is what he had to say on June 20th when the House voted:

The FISA bill we considered today would compromise the constitutionally guaranteed rights that make America a beacon of hope around the world.

Today's vote was not easy. I stood up to leaders of my own party and voted against this bill, because I took an oath to defend Americans and That duty is most important when it is most difficult. We can protect our nation while upholding our values, but unfortunately, this bill falls short.

Rep. Carol Shea-Porter (D-NH) has fought to protect the constitution and to respect the traditional New Hampshire motto: "Live Free Or Die." In her state people don't give up hard-won liberties for some tinpot would-be tyrant. Her opponent, a rubber stamp zombie she beat in 2006, is trying to make a comeback and is beating up on her by claiming her defense of the Constitution was... unpatriotic. She's fighting back... proudly and unapologetically. This is part of what she wrote in the Union Leader two weeks ago:

The foundation of democracy is individual freedom from government interference. I am willing to compromise on many issues-- but not on the Constitution. Being forced to choose between protecting our national security or protecting our Constitution is a false choice; we do not have to sacrifice one for the other. It is our responsibility as Americans to protect both.

Doug Tudor isn't in office. He's running against the third ranking Republican in the House, central Florida ideologue and extremist Adam Putnam. Doug is a 20 year Navy veteran and he takes the Constitution for which he fought and risked his life very seriously. His comments about the FISA battle were jarring for their straightforward, no holds barred directness:

"On five occasions during my Navy career, I raised my hand and affirmed 'to protect and defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic.' Members of Congress take a similar oath. I believe that those members who voted in favor of HR 6304 did so in violation of their oath of office. I would have voted against this bill."

Needless to say, Putnam was jumping up and down and eager as a little redheaded beaver for the warrantless wiretaps to be made legal for his campaign contributors in the telecom industry to have their minds set to rest that they would never have to answer for any crimes they may have committed.

Dennis Shulman is a blind rabbi in northern New Jersey running for a House seat currently occupied by the last radical right Republican left in the Northeast United States, Scott Garrett, who has taken over $9,000 from the Telecom industry this year and, of course, is gung-ho for wiretapping Americans. Dennis spent a great deal of time thinking this issue through. Here's what he told us:

"The House of Representatives, with the support of Republican Scott Garrett, recently passed a bill that would grant President Bush and future administrations unprecedented powers to spy on American citizens without a warrant or review by any judge or court. The new law would also let our nation's largest telecom companies off the hook for knowingly violating the law and releasing their customers' private information at the behest of George Bush.

"Our constitutional right to protection against unsupervised searches was written into our Bill of Rights for good reason by Founders whom we rightly celebrate.

"Neither President Bush nor Scott Garrett are as wise as James Madison.

"It is unfortunate that it appears that the telecom industry has managed to falsely conflate its quest for retroactive immunity for lawbreaking with the issue of national security. The Founding Fathers understood that our safety as a nation depended on our being a nation of laws. Retroactive immunity undermines the rule of law, and therefore undermines our principles and security as a nation.

"The President, his advisers, and his rubber stamps in Congress, including Scott Garrett, have demonstrated a pattern of disregard for the laws of the United States. This bill not only immunizes telecom companies from lawsuits, but it would also block the American people from ever knowing the full extent of the Bush Administration's illegal behavior.

"I urge my fellow Democrats in the Senate to vote against this unnecessary and deeply troubling law.

"I believe that Congress must protect the rights of citizens and the laws of our country from career politicians in Washington too willing to cave to special interests and endanger the fundamental rights that we, as Americans, hold so dear."

State Senator Andrew Rice (D-OK) is running a strong campaign against one of the most extremist members of the U.S. Senate, James Inhofe, who raked in $12,550 from the Telecoms this year and was determined to grant them retroactive immunity -- and positively giddy about giving the government the right to listen in to all phone conversations and read all e-mails without a court order. Andrew disagrees -- strongly:

"Congress must remain vigilant in order to protect Americans from another terrorist attack. However, the bill that is before Congress this week bargains away the privacy of law-abiding American citizens while protecting the companies that allegedly participated in the President's illegal wiretapping program. The Senate should stick to the narrow fix it set out to accomplish by making it clear that the government does not have to obtain a warrant to listen to foreign-to-foreign communications. Instead, this bill allows a significant expansion of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act so that government can eavesdrop on the international communications of innocent American citizens. Since losing my brother on 9/11, I have vowed to improve America's anti-terrorism capability without sacrificing the freedoms that so many Americans have died to protect."

Rick Noriega is running in that big ole state just south of Oklahoma. His opponent, rubber stamp corporate shill John Cornyn has taken $15,250 from the Telecom industry this year and he is as eager as Inhofe to grant them retroactive immunity. Rick has thought about the issue more seriously and from a different perspective than just helping out campaign contributors.

"Many times throughout my lifetime I have sworn an oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States . This isn't a part-time Constitution. We as a nation cannot grant anyone sweeping amnesty if they break the rules. It's appalling that my opponent, John Cornyn, puts his special interest campaign contributors ahead of the Constitution. Texans have had enough.

Americans will not accept an abuse of power, and they will not accept corporations getting away with breaking the law.

We already have a law in place that balances national security concerns while adhering to the Constitution. This is not the time to compromise the privacy of the American people and not the time to disregard the Constitution of United States. I regret that the Senate has voted this way."

Jim Himes is standing firmly with his state's senior senator, Chris Dodd on this issue. Fake moderate Chris Shayes is once again eager to rubber stamp the Bush-Cheney agenda, somehow trying to say that granting Bush the ability to wiretap all American citizens without a court order makes us "safe." Jim sees right through that craven, partisan posturing:

"In Congress, I will always stand up for the fundamental American belief that no man, and no corporation, is above the law. As always, this is a matter for the courts to decide-- not for Congress, and absolutely not for the same Bush Administration who may have violated the law in the first place. It is great to see so many American citizens of all backgrounds coming together to stand up for the rule of law and in opposition to retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies who may have illegally spied on American citizens at the Bush Administration's request. I am disappointed that Chris Shays and so many others continue to stand with President Bush by refusing to stand up for this most fundamental of American principles."

Jon Tester (D-MT) was a populist underdog who ran for the Senate in 2006 against an Insider Democrat backed by Chuck Schumer and the Beltway Establishment. He beat him in the primary, beat an entrenched Republican incumbent in November and has gone on to represent the interests of regular Montana folks in DC. His statement about the this fight was an inspiration and may well have influenced his Montana colleague: "It deals with the freedoms that so many people have fought and died for. If we want to get serious about the War on Terror, we need to make the investments to fight the war on terror. We ought not be taking rights away from honest citizens. If we've got terror cells around the world, then let's invest in human intelligence. Let's invest in our Special Forces. Let's go after 'em, and let's be serious, and not get sidetracked by Iraq. Right now, we're taking rights away from honest people. If they think you fall into their list, you're a target. By the time they figure out there's a terror cell, they can get a warrant.... The government ought not be taking away our freedoms."

Darcy Burner is running against a corporate hack and rubber stamp in Washington, Dave Reichert, who is all about rewarding his corporate donors with retroactive immunity. Reichert took $6,000 for the Telecoms so far this year and thinks they should not be accountable for crimes they may have committed. Darcy has been one of the most outspoken opponents of this bill; watch the 30 second video. After the bill passed in the House, she didn't despair; she start rallying for action:

Like many of you, I'm incredibly disappointed with today's vote on retroactive immunity for the telecommunications companies. I've made my position on this issue very clear, and I've been happy to be fighting to ensure that we uphold the Constitution through all of this. But the real question is what we do going forward. We need to make sure that we elect people to Congress who are going to defend the Constitution at the same time that the keep this country safe. I promise you, I will never let you down on that. It's time for us to elect more and better Democrats.

We're less concerned about the "more" and focussing on the "better." We will send each of these patriotic Americans a grassroots contribution for $1,000. If you haven't donated yet and would like to, please feel free-- right here. Let me leave you with a final thought from Senator Dodd. He's talking about you:

Lastly, I want to thank the thousands who joined with us in this fight around the country - those who took to the blogs, gathered signatures for online petitions and created a movement behind this issue. Men and women, young and old, who stood up, spoke out and gave us the strength to carry on this fight. Not one of them had to be involved, but each choose to become involved for one reason and one reason alone: Because they love their country. They remind us that the "silent encroachments of those in power" Madison spoke of can, in fact, be heard, if only we listen.

UPDATE: RUSS FEINGOLD ASKED US TO REDIRECT HIS CHECK

Senator Feingold isn't running for re-election in 2008. He was pleased that we're recognizing his service to the country and he asked us to send the $1,000 check to the Patriot Corps. He's been saying for years that a strong grassroots field program is the key to electoral victory. That's why his Progressive Patriots Fund created the Patriot Corps in 2006-- a way to support progressive candidates nationwide. In the lead-up to the 2008 election, the Progressive Patriots Fund will again be hiring, training and sending field staff to key races across the country. 

Comments

[JRandomPoster]

It is incredible how quickly many have accepted the new FISA laws as just another bit of business as usual.

One of the most subtle and insidious changes that this administration has perpetrated on the American people is the manipulation of facts and opinion to the point where Americans are no longer outraged by these affronts to our rights and to our constitution for very long. We seem to head straight to stoic acceptance, be it in response to the drums or war, the trashing of the environment, the selling of our nation at wholesale to the corporations and China, or the trampling of the constitution. So many acts have been committed that are simply corrupt, are for the gains of the few, that are completely self serving, that many just consider them to be on the level of the daily tragedy news paper stories of auto wrecks and convince store robberies.

It is going to take a long time for America to heal, if it ever can.

[repearwo]

There is another possibility, that we know if we all just get past the politics of division we can begin to correct those abuses.

Most people have information overload the new way of censorship. Instead of trying to styfle information you just dump so much that what you are concerned about gets lost in the noise.

But if you know what is happening you can combat it. All the information that was needed to to make an informed decision on Iraq was right out in fornt of us. Most people did not see or hear it.

[Okieborn]

SINCE our Constution is going to hell in a hand basket , what might I ask does the citizenry of this country have to protect their rights ???


As an American I have to say Sen. Dodd and Feingold are exactly what America should be about !!


Thank You for Standing up for the privacy rights of Americans !!!

[repearwo]

FIrst, this bill does not change anything in the Constitution or the Bill of Rights. All bills passed are but an interpretation of the constitution by the legistlative branch. Quite often the loosing side beleives that one law or another is of great damage to the constitution.

The "decider" is the Supreme Court. All laws are constitutional that are passed by Congress until the Supreme Court says otherwise. Period.

Now the ALCU has filed a suit which may bring the issue ultimately to the Supreme Court. That is the way our government works. All bills in Congress in one way or another involve Constitutional issues. The Cosntitution is every bit as strong and viable today as when it was written passed through politcal struggle.

The Government which operates under our constitution may be going to hell in a hand basket, but not the Constitution, not yet anyway. If the citizens of the US get any less aware of how their governement really works, that may not be the case for long.

[AnotherTry]

Since we all know they've been spying, what do you think they have on Obama that forces him to be such a crappy centrist?

[hank48188]

This is just another example of Obama trying to be all things to all people, just look at his record. Obama ususally will try to skip tough votes, in illinois he could vote "Present", did that 130 times and even had the nerve to CLAIM he hit the wrong button on votes 6 TIMES, even a 6 year old kid could do better than that. Obama is being backed by the ultra-rich Internationalists like George Soros, I think most of you here have been BAMBOOZELED and HOODWINKED by all of Obama talk, but it's JUST WORDS, just look at his actions.

[repearwo]

Are you people really this dumb? To win the Presidency a person, any person has to win 50+% of tjhe vote. The left wing is called the left wing because it is a minority on the left side of the body politic. Anyone who wants to be President has to appeal to more than one purist minority.

It is an increasingly insane exercise in self-delusion but until it is changed it is the way we do things. If you want your ideas to be represented by the President, then you vote for the candidate that represents the 50=% of the voting public that loosly encompass your ideas.

It is not rocket-science, it is Civics. The Party's always are forced to find coalitions of people with similar views. If indeed you are of the center/left-of-center you disparage Obama at your own political risk.

[Schaz]

I'm very glad to see you recognize Darcy Burner, but what I think is most important to mention about her contributions is the "Responsible Plan to End the War in Iraq" (http://www.darcyburner.com/blog/lead_article/darcys_responsible_plan_receives_national_publicity/).

[repearwo]

The "Plan" is pretty typical of people who assume their superiority of thought and speech.

The fact is and has been for over four years now that we got into Iraq and "won" in less than 30 days, under hostile fire. We can get out in the same period of time, six months top.

It is interesting we are always told how complicated it is to get out and how easy it is to get in.

We can plan, and discuss and write reports and have have committees, but in the end, getting out is putting one foot in front of the other and walking out. It is an action not a plan. We do not so much need a "Responsible Plan" as a responsible commitment to the Action of Getting Out Of Iraq.

The only way to do that is to make sure that Obama is elected President. These Act Blue people are putting Obama's election at risk every bit as much as the Republicans. Jane H. was wringing here blood drenched hands over the writers strike when FDL and the rest of the self-inflated bloggers should have focused on the War.

There is but one solution, to get out of iraq, and only one Candidate to do that, Obama.

[WomanInOrangeSweater]

The actual senate roll call vote is more interesting than this article, which is incomplete. What I found interesting (aside from Obama's vote) is the fact that Webb and Bayh also voted yes. And as usual, McCain didn't bother to show up. Has anyone checked the guy's voting record? It's abysmal. He rarely shows up. And people consider him a serious candidate? Insane.

[PumaAnn]

I wouldn't go there, if I were you. Obama's record on missed votes is nearly as bad if not worse.

[WomanInOrangeSweater]

Nope. Obama's record is bad, granted. i've got a real problem with it. But McCain's is ridiculous. I don't think he's even shown up since March. Check out congressmerge.com.

[repearwo]

And what is they had not?

Was there ever even a chance that this bill would have gone down to defeat?

The answer is no. So the voting decisions were not if the bill was going to pass or not, but how the vote would play politically. In the people were against this, the Senate would have been against this. If you have any questions, this "war" was illegal and ill advised from day one, but the US citizens supported it, because they are easily manipulated by nationalism, fear, and the worst of all things "Partiotism" (wahtever that Partiotism is) .

If Obama had voted for it McCain would have had his issue, but now he is just like a three legged frog, screaming "flip-flopper".

[tbone99]

Thanks Obama for supporting Barrow a pro war candidate against another Dem and anti war candidate in the Ga primary.With friends like you, who needs enemies?

[CindyV]

You forget Hillary Rodham Clinton who also voted to support the constitution.

[repearwo]

Yes, now that she is not a candidate any more. Get it?

[janedarcy]

Yea, we get it...just like BO can say he was against the war when he still was in the Ill State senate and did not have to prove his actions.

[shep1900]

Kudos to all of them!

Especially Feingold, my longtime favorite.

[research]

Kucinich and his coalition is the man we should be supporting.

Right now he is trying to impeach this criminal administration.

http://kucinich.us/

see his speech on FISA.

BushCo has dirt on over half of the dems.

That's what the spying was for.

"Welcome to the Senate, Cheney wants to talk to you about those web site you visited. "

[bayside]

We need another party..We the people party..

[repearwo]

Which people?

[ballsmuch]

to hear Senator Feingold urge his colleagues about the legal scope of the spy program says a lot to me about our elected officials. i mean they were presented with the opportunity to hear from Feingold in a classified setting as to how unlawful the program is and they still chose to support this bill. it's like they stuck their fingers in their ears and wanted to be wholly ignorant. these people took an oath to defend the Constitution and they couldn't even hear Feingold out. something stinks really bad here.

[SpoxLogic]

All of you folks are a little late. This is kinda like closing the barn door long after the horse is out of the barn and ran off to the next county!
FISA isn't the first and end all to the attacks on the Constitution. This has been going on insidiously for at least 40 years. And it started in your city with such things as cameras in public places - all in the effort to fight crime. The Drug War was another attack. Where were all of you Constitution lovers then?

Once the masses all became acclimatized to the lcoal changes, it didn't take much to get something like the current FISA version thru. And isn't FISA like 30 years old? Why haven't you guys been raising a stink about it from the beginning - like 30 years ago. (Insidious again - small changes over time).

The American people have been slowly bought to this point - and the fact that 90% of the populace isn't raising a big stink is testimony to the success of the Govt (some in the Govt) to control all of us.

PEACE!

[ballsmuch]

you are grossly misinterpreting the 4th amendment with your example of cameras in public places. just saying.

[repearwo]

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons"

Cameras placed by the Government for surveilance of their citizens could very easily be argued a violation of a person right to be secure in their person.

While when we enter the public arena our expectations of privacy are diminished, knowing that our every action is potentially being watched and recorded has a deterant effect upon free expression of rights. Among those rights is free association with persons and groups of persons as long as no laws are broken.

our governemnts support of renditions and detention of people with little or no evidence of wrong doing other than assosciation with groups deemed a threat, cameras controled by the Governemnt suddenly become a bit more sinister.

[WorkingClass]

"The Drug War was another attack. Where were all of you Constitution lovers then"?

Thank you so much. I've been saying that the drug war proved that Americans didn't actually care about the constitution. The war on drugs + the war on terror = the war on freedom.

[NHampshire]

CS Porter is terrible and she is going to be voted OUT in 2008.

NH is suffering under the neanderthalistic 'progressives' who have set us back years and put the state in debt.

[rovezaleeker]

Thanks Howie. I will continue to do my part. I will vote for Russell Feingold here in northern Wisconsin every time he runs for re-election until the day I die.

[buckygreen]

Russ will be in Oshkosh Sunday and I intend to go tell him personally how much I admire, respect, and support him. We are blessed to have an American patriot as our Senator, and I'm with you that hes got my vote for anything anytime. Herb Kohl? Not so much.

[Jonny38103]

Thank you, Mr. Klein, for shining the light on the politicians who voted correctly. And thanks again for introducing us to a true hero, Doug Tudor, the kind of representative needed for Florida's 12th district. For additional information, see www.teamtudor.org.