The Senate Democrats (and a few Republicans) did the right thing.

[originalpckelly]

We need to congratulate these people because it must have been very hard and took A LOT of courage to stand up to the political games of the Senate Republicans. Only 1, just 1 Democrat voted against the writ of habeas corpus, considering the great pressure to do so, it is a very low number.

I encourage all DUers to donate to any of the Democrats on the roll call list of yeas because they truly do deserve to be re-elected and they deserve our greatest effort to ensure their victory.

We may win this, if this new courage is a sign of things to come!

[acmavm]

1. Who was that one dem?

[fooj]

2. Nelson. Nebraska.

:grr:

[Coexist]

14. huge surprise there, huh!

Not.

[JerseygirlCT]

3. Nelson, NE

Coward.

[Nutmegger]

4. I was going to guess the other one from Flordia.

Not too surprised.

[JerseygirlCT]

7. I typed that at first, w/o even thinking

Then realized I was wrong.

[Liberalynn]

11. Thank you

Hilary Clinton and Chuck Schumer for showing NY State stands up for the rule of law! :applause:

[acmavm]

13. I figured it was. Weasel bastard.

I don't do well here in this state of bigoted red necked whiney assholes. I wish I could move. Far far away.

[Robbien]

5. Statement of Feingold against torture bill

And that is why I am saddened that I must oppose this legislation. Because, Mr. President, the trials conducted under this legislation will send a very different signal to the world, one that I fear will put our own troops and personnel in jeopardy both now and in future conflicts. To take just a few examples, this legislation would permit an individual to be convicted on the basis of coerced testimony and hearsay, would not allow full judicial review of the conviction, and yet would allow someone convicted under these rules to be put to death. That is simply unacceptable. We would not stand for another country to try our citizens under those rules, and we should not stand for our own government to do so, either.

Not only that, this legislation would deny detainees at Guantanamo Bay and elsewhere—people who have been held for years but have not been tried or even charged with any crime—the ability to challenge their detention in court. Among its many flaws, this is the most troubling—that the legislation seeks to suspend the Great Writ of habeas corpus.

The legislation before us is better than that originally proposed by the President, which would have largely codified the procedures the Supreme Court has already rejected. And that is thanks to the efforts of some of my Republican colleagues for whom I have great respect and admiration.

But this bill remains deeply flawed, and I cannot support it.

http://www.commondreams.org/news2006/0928-01.htm

:thumbsup: Senator

[Marie26]

6. 48 - 51

If Nelson had turned, and Snowe had voted, it would have changed everything. It just took two votes to end a legal procedure that's 2000 years old. It's sort of stunning.

[originalpckelly]

8. All is not lost yet, and you will see that soon.

If the SCOTUS had enough votes to overrule the previous practice, then it is likely they will do the same here.

[Marie26]

9. I hope so

And I also believe that they will. The Supreme Court is really the last hope here.

[acmavm]

15. Dream on. Can you give me some of whatever makes you

have such happy nocturnal fantasies? The SCOTUS won't deep six this one.

[Kierkegaard]

10. The world watched in stunned silence as a once great nation

slid into the dark pit of barbarianism.

[wiggs]

12. "It must have been very hard and took a lot of courage to stand up

to the political games of the Senate Republicans?" I don't get this premise of the OP.

[Hubert Flottz]

16. Nelson is the next Joe Lieberman.

A total Zellout!