but I think this is a fight worth fighting. Whether it can be won or not.

These guys work for us.

We need to remind them of that, once in a while.

I did inhale.

I did inhale.

I agree with Don.

I know I'm not the only Dem who has become an ex-Dem and my sense is -- both here in the blogosphere and here in rural TX -- that the number of Dem dropouts is growing quite significantly.

Something needs to be done by those who are still committed to the Party to make sure not only that the Democratic leadership gets (listens to!) the message from the "grassroots" so that the grassroots don't dry up and blow away. Shouting "how could you!" at us isn't going to do it. I'm a strong supporter of Feingold -- in his current effort at censure and in general. If there were great support for Feingold coming from Democrats outside of Washington, I think many of us defecting Dems would feel there was still a team to play on and contribute to.

The fight is now, and the least we can do is flood Feingold with support for his censure effort and for continuing to act as a moral compass within the Party.

Dear Senator Feinstein:
It has beed extremely disappointing over the last 24 hours to have seen the sickening lask of support for your colleague, Senator Feingold, in his attempt to propose and bring to vote, the resolution to censure President Bush.

It is being make very clear in *many* public forums your proposal to censure former-president Clinton for his lying about a consensual affair with and adult female.

Knowing this, it makes very little sense for you at present to withold support for your team-mate, as he seeks to bring censure to a president who has broken a very important statute, repeatedly, admits this action, and appears to be proud of his activity. To the average citizen of your state, this is much worse than something as innocuous as lying about sex. Please let me be clear on this:

THIS ADMINISTRATION IS SPYING ON US AND USING THAT INFORMATION TO OUR DETRIMENT

If you think for a moment that they haven't been checking your communications, please think again....your opposition has read their Sun Tzu, and take full advantage of every oppotunity to strengthen their position. By not standing tegether with your team-mate(s), you're playing their game, and literally planting your foot in the faces of your constituents.

I Plead with you at this point to re-consider your support for Senator Feingold's resolution, and to convince your other team-mates to make the same commitment. Stating strong Principles mean nothing at all if, when the chips are down, you retreat from those Principles and remain silent while your team-mate gets mauled.

Thank you for your time
-5.75,-4.05 "The invisible hand of Adam Smith seems to offer an extended middle finger to an awful lot of people"---George Carlin

My Senators, Mr. Levin and Whats-Her-face, both need more time to suss the politics of it. I call them everyday and ask where they stand.

Today, Levin's office said that its the wiretap investigation currently getting the Senators attention. I noted that the independent version was already voted down, the R's hold the Senate, and the chance that anything will come of it is pretty much nill. Levin's clerk/intern/phone-answer-guy respectfully disagreed.

OK then. I still don't see why Levin couldn't support Feingold. Afterall, he did vote to censure Clinton. When I brought that up, *cue crickets chirping*

To me, it seems they are deciding for themselves where the best face time is; backing Feingold, or during a drawn out dog-and-pony show. Levin will never get Best of Show, of course. But he's an old dog who knows how to get noticed without prancing about. Levin is comfortable in the ring. Honestly, I like the guy.

Thats not enough anymore. Feingold for President. I'm sending him $250 right now. No biscuts for those not pulling their weight. And cookies for those that do. If we all did something similar --call it the Democratic Leadership Reward Program-- we very well could see more of the type of action that we want to see.

IOW, don't just roll over and expect your belly will be scratched. BARK!!

Um, may I remind you that in 1998-9 the Republicans ruled both the House and the Senate. The move for censure of Bill Clinton was a tactic initiated by the Democrats during the impeachment debates.

This is why a Senator can never win the Presidency. THere are too many votes that sound bad taken out of context. You here at Agonist are happy to smear help the GOP slime machine get Democrats, with 10-year old votes taken out of context.

No, actually Feinstein introduced her censure resolution on February 12, 1999, shortly AFTER the Senate voted to acquit President Clinton on the Articles of Impeachment. See this contemparaneous CNN account: http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1999/02/12/whats.next/

So yes, while it may have been a "tactic" by the Dems, it was not a tactic designed to forestall right-wing pressure to impeach and remove him from office -- he had already been impeached, and he had already been acquitted, when Feinstein introduced her little gem of a censure resolution. Furthermore the Dems had made significant gains in the November 1998 elections, an obvious reaction by middle America against the excesses of the Republicans in the Lewinsky Affair. Yet STILL, Democrats rather than pressing the huge political advantage by hanging the anti-American Taliban-like excesses of the so-called religious right around neck of the Republican party like an anchor, the scared little Dems scrambled to put themselves on the record saying "yes, we too think blow jobs are icky".

Kind of like how 41 Senators in the Senate are too scared of their shadows today to stand up for what remains of the Constitution and call the President on his lawbreaking even as his approval ratings sink below 35%. The more things change...

I was aware of that. Actually both impeachment and censure were resolved on the same day, 2/12/99. I didn't mean to imply the censure was a trick. It was a real response to the political situation of the day, supported by most Democrats, and I can only assume it was appropriate at the time.

BTW Feingold was the only Democrat to vote in FAVOR of letting the Clinton impeachment proceed. Maybe he thought blow jobs are icky, too.

And btw I'll bet those 41 Democrats will vote in favor of the Censure, if it comes to the floor. It is not that they disagree, it is just so obvious that it is the wrong emphasis right now, we should be talking about how Bush is bad for America. Just watch how the censure idea makes the public forget everything bad about Bush. The Republicans are ecstatic about Feingold's censure.

With Democrats not having control of either the House of Representatives or the Senate, what is the point? If there aren't enough votes for something to be passed, it's an exercise in futility to introduce censure, because it's bound to be defeated. And Democrats that support it, come off with just having egg on their face.

Limbaugh and his ilk must be really enjoying the '5 minute' Feingold moment!

On CNBC tonight, Pat Buchanan said that the Democrats are making a big mistake by moving to censure Bush. According to Buchanan, Democrats have nothing to gain at this point from setting themselves up against Bush for a fight. "It's like a football game. Bush is down, he's out, he's over! There are two minutes left on the clock, and all the Democrats have to do is run the clock out, but instead, they take a big chance with a risky maneuver."

Now, I know Buchanan is very conservative, but he sounded very sincere, and what he said does make sense. Also, Keith Olbermann interviewed someone from the Daily Kos, and during the interview, Olbermann was very transparent in expressing his thoughts that moving for a censure was not a good idea. Olbermann went so far as to tell the guy from the Daily Kos to keep his focus on what was important--the 2006 elections. And we all know Olbermann has no agenda to hide.

Interestingly, on Jim Cramer's Mad Money, Cramer, a stock analyst, said, "When you have a losing stock, and it's down with no sign of coming back, cut your losses. Don't live in a world of denial like the Bush administration--get rid of it!" And this was on CNBC, a business channel!

Just some thoughts to think about.