Shame on Wisconsin

Shame on Wisconsin.

You just threw out the only member of the U.S. Senate with any integrity. You just demonstrated that this country is ruled by a small cabal of moneyed interests, with millions of uneducated rednecks as their foot soldiers. Feingold was our last citizen-senator. He was, for his entire time in office, the poorest member of the Senate, yet he consistently returned his pay raises. He consistently voted his ideals, rather than chasing re-election. It caught up with him yesterday, to all of our detriment.

I met Mr. Feingold once. I’ll never forget it. It was September 9, 2006. There were about 20 other people at a small party in Orlando. He gave a quick speech, and asked for questions. I asked, “when did we become a nation of mewling cowards? When did we forget that this country was built upon a desire for liberty, and not for fleeting specious safety?”

I asked it to be provocative. I figured I would get some typical canned response. He smiled with the utmost sincerity and quoted John Cornyn, Republican from Texas, who famously stated: “Your civil liberties aren’t worth much if you’re dead.” Feingold mocked Cornyn and anyone who agreed with him. Feingold expressed pride and disappointment that he was the only dissenting voice when the PATRIOT act was rushed through. Feingold understands what the idea of America is supposed to (used to) be.

I remember, as Feingold did, that on September 11, 2001, a lot of people were afraid of what might happen next. But, I remember that many of us were not afraid of terrorism, we were not afraid of what would happen to us at the hand of a foreign enemy, but we were afraid of our own government. I remember saying to anyone who would listen, “I’m afraid of what this Administration will do now that they have this as a justification for doing anything they want.” Feingold remembered that sentiment as well. Feingold was the only member of the Senate who cared more about standing up for those of us with that fear than his 99 colleagues who all stood up for rubber-stamping Bush’s destruction of the Constitution.

In 2001, I watched as dissent began to be equated with disloyalty. Questioning became equated with sabotage. Standing up for what you believed in became equated with treason.

My fears unfolded as the Patriot Act was rolled out. Did anyone really believe that the government worked tirelessly to “protect us,” drafting the Patriot Act almost overnight? Or was this a wish list of authoritarian desires that had simply been waiting in a file marked “Do Not Release Until We Have a Good Excuse.”

I watched as 99 of Russ Feingold’s colleagues voted to pass this sweeping measure that changed what it meant to be an American. There was almost no debate, and save Feingold, no dissent. I remember the gratitude I felt toward him for being the only one who stood up for us. I realize that some of his colleagues voted for the Patriot Act out of fear, and I know that some voted for it to further ignoble goals. But I also remember his bravery and his willingness to suffer the consequences for standing up for us.

After the public comment portion of the party, I spent a little time talking to Mr. Feingold. We discussed the sweeping statements that “we must win the War on Terror.” And I remember thinking, “what does that mean?” How do you win a war on an emotion? We talked about the phrase “pre- 9/11 thinking” entering the lexicon. We talked about “pre-9/11 thinking” being used to justify measures that suppressed the vote in Minnesota. Remember “pre-9/11 thinking” being used to justify the incremental chipping away at our civil liberties.

We had only one member of the senate who wanted Pre-9/11 thinking. One guy stood up. Just one. He stood up for 1776 thinking.

Feingold lost that vote for the Patriot Act, and our curtain of security theater descended. We changed that day. We lost our war with Al Quaeda – since they changed us, but they get to continue living the way they want to. In fact, their ideals have never been so secure. Meanwhile ours are nothing more than fairy tales in history books. The day that the “battle for America” happened, 99 members of the United States Senate surrendered who we were. They surrendered what we believed in. They surrendered our Constitution and our ideals. Some of them did it for a little gift box of power, others to assuage their fears, and others just to keep their jobs.

Feingold, however, stood on Bunker Hill with his musket in hand, short of ammunition, and he fought.

While I think that Feingold’s brightest moment was when he was the one voice of dissent, he consistently was the conscience of the Senate. After being one of only 23 senators to vote against the Iraq war, he was the first senator to demand a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq. He was one of the few to call for Bush to be censured for his illegal wiretapping of American citizens. Despite being an unabashed Liberal, he was often the voice of fiscal responsibility — such as when he was, again, a lone voice against insanity (in 2007) when the Senate killed off a “pay-as-you-go” measure financing tax cuts for the wealthy by using a projected 2012 surplus. I think we all know that projection for a surplus is no longer current.

But back to that day in 2006. I told Feingold that Bush, and Cheney, and Rumsfeld, and Sam Brownback, were all correct — that history will judge us, including Senator Feingold, for how we reacted in 2001. However, I had hope that history would not judge anyone the way that the dipshit-in-chief in 2001 imagined. I told Feingold that history would remember what he did for us. I told him that history would remember that he did not acquiesce to the dismantling of America in 2001, and that I was disappointed that he served with 99 mewling cowards.

Unfortunately, history seems to be some ways off. And today, the people of Wisconsin awaken to the aftermath of their ignorance. They awaken to the joyous bleating of the Tea Party, determined to remove Mr. Feingold from office because of the health care bill — as if it were a great black mark on the republic.

So today, we close the chapter on the last citizen senator. The last guy who stood up for us, without concern for his own avarice or ambition.

Shame on you, Wisconsin.

And if Russ Feingold needs a job, the Randazza Legal Group would hire him in a heartbeat. We seem to have good luck with people who have Wisconsin in their background — no matter what their politics may be.

(My co-blogger’s counterpoint is here)

15 Responses to Shame on Wisconsin

  1. Marc says:

    I agree with you on Feingold, but you integrity in the Senate still exists at least in the form of one Bernie Sanders (I-VT). While he was not in the Senate in 2001, he did vote against the Patriot Act in the House and has been vocal in his efforts to curb its abuses since then.

  2. You’re right. I forgot that Bernie is in the Senate now.

  3. […] over on war issues, and trampled each other to look Tougher On Terrorism — Feingold actually stood up for (non-First-Amendment) civil liberties. It’s a shame that he loses while faux-Democrats like Boxer […]

  4. Derek says:

    I voted for Feingold this election, and despite having legitimate issues with his record (most notably the worthless piece of shit that now, thankfully, WAS the McCain-Feingold Campaign Finance Reform Act), I was crushed to see him lose to Ron Johnson.

    One of the only honest, principled people in Congress was voted out in favor of an asshat who won’t tell people what his positions are on major issues, and who agrees with using the provisions in the Patriot Act – including wiretapping American citizens – but only when Bush was in office.

    For the second time in recent memory – after voting a gay marriage ban into our state constitution – I’m ashamed to be from Wisconsin.

  5. evrenseven says:

    Keep in mind people that Wisconsin gave us Joe McCarthy.

    • J DeVoy says:

      And Dahmer, Gein, Favre (not really, but he’s so ingrained into the Wisconsin psyche that it’s frightening; when he retired EVERYONE owned and wore his jersey) – it’s a weird little place.

  6. […] Randazza is sorry that Senator Feingold lost. His fellow blogger DeVoy is glad that he did. […]

  7. Alan says:

    Feingold was a great Senator, great American and great Patriot. But I’m not sure about that “Shame on Wisconsin” thing. At least Wisconsin gave him the opportunity to serve for three terms (18 years), which is more than you can say for most states.

  8. as says:

    thank you for this post. i’d not been fond of him because of mccain feingold (even though i think there needs to be serious campaign finance reform, or possibly public campaign finance to me it’s hard to argue that campaign donations aren’t speech) but i’d forgotten about the patriot act vote. that’s pretty awesome,a really great moment.

  9. I can respect those who have a problem with McCain-Feingold. I think that the arguments against it range from nutty on one end to First Amendment purist on the other. I think that we can all agree that McCain-Feingold might have been a bad way to implement a good idea, but I don’t think that anyone can question Feingold’s motives (even as they trash his execution of the idea).

    • Derek says:

      I understand his motives, but I take issue not only with the execution, but also the fact that he refused to admit (even after the Supreme Court struck down the provisions on speech in the days leading up to an election on First Amendment grounds) that it was un-Constitutional. That being said, the rest of his record far outstrips that one (now-defunct) bill, and should be held as an example to every single Senator of how they should act while in office.

  10. as says:

    marco, i completely agree with you–i don’t question his motives at all or deny that the perpetual fundraising is a horrible blight on democracy.as you correctly guessed, my problems were pure first amendment. but i really do love your story about him.
    have you posted on the sup ct video games argument yet? the writeups of the argument make it sound hilarious, and the alliances in it are fascinating.

  11. CTD says:

    I don’t think that anyone can question Feingold’s motives

    You’re right. His motives were beyond question. They were to protect himself and his incumbent cronies from criticism.

  12. […] blog called The Legal Satyricon has an excellent essay on the demise of Senator Russ Feingold. I am compelled to chime in and […]

  13. Lee says:

    Me thinks you have the better of this argument.

%d bloggers like this: