Corzine wins in New Jersey as does Kaine in Virginia. More to come on this later.

Yesterday, when Senator Reid invoked rule 21 and brought the Senate into a closed-session, he did something more courageous than any other Democratic leader. Senator Reid forced discussion regarding Phase II of an investigation being conducted by the Intelligence Committee. Phase I covered the failures of the intelligence agencies, but didn’t include information on the White House Iraq Group or the White House’s use of intelligence, that is what Phase II was for, and as we can imagine it has been long over-due.

Republicans cried politics and dirty tricks, but that’s not what happened. Instead the Democratic Party became the party of the opposition, it marched into the Senate and used today to set a deadline for findings and to force Congress to act in regard to the possible misuse of intelligence in advocating for the Iraq War. No one knows what was said, but we can all imagine that Senator Reid was speaking intensely, as he never once left the Senate chamber to address the media in the corridor remaining inside the entire time rallying the troops and keeping us on message.

Republicans would have loved for the story to be about a “hijacked Senate” and everything else, but the media and sees it differently, because at the end of the session emerged answers and commitment to the investigation, obviously things were accomplished.

This is what Democratic leadership is all about. Most importantly, this is a message to the American people, that the Democratic Party despite being a minority is still working for the people, still working to find answers, and more than capable to retake the reigns of government in 2006 and make a positive change.

The Senate is back from a closed session, it has been announced that each party will choose three members to form a six member task-force in order to investigate and report on the progress of the Senate Intelligence Committee’s progress in Phase II of the investigation, and will report back with the information and a date for completion no later than the close of business on November 14th. More to come, but it looks like while the Republicans are complaining, the over all goal of the closed session, forcing debate on this issue and moving Phase II forward, has been at leat mostly accomplished.

Reported first by The Raw Story Senator Reid has taken the Senate into a Clossed Session at 2:25pm in order to discuss Iraq War intelligence and the CIA Leak Case. No other news sources are confirming at this time, but turning to C-SPAN confirms this and are replaying Reid’s statement that called for the session, the Senate is at this time in clossed session for the first time since the Senate discussed matters pertaining to Clinton’s impeachment in 1997. Here is part of the statement by Reid:

This past weekend, we witnessed the indictment of the I. Lewis Libby, the Vice President’s Chief of Staff and a senior Advisor to President Bush. Libby is the first sitting White House staffer to be indicted in 135 years. This indictment raises very serious charges. It asserts this Administration engaged in actions that both harmed our national security and are morally repugnant.

The decision to place U.S. soldiers in harm’s way is the most significant responsibility the Constitution invests in the Congress. The Libby indictment provides a window into what this is really about: how the Administration manufactured and manipulated intelligence in order to sell the war in Iraq and attempted to destroy those who dared to challenge its actions.

As a result of its improper conduct, a cloud now hangs over this Administration. This cloud is further darkened by the Administration’s mistakes in prisoner abuse scandal, Hurricane Katrina, and the cronyism and corruption in numerous agencies.

[...]

We demand that the Intelligence Committee and other committees in this body with jurisdiction over these matters carry out a full and complete investigation immediately as called for by Democrats in the committee’s annual intelligence authorization report. Our troops and the American people have sacrificed too much. It is time this Republican-controlled Congress put the interests of the American people ahead of their own political interests.

More on this as it develops. Give ‘Em Hell Harry!

UPDATE: 3:24pm: The AP Wires are now running a story, apparently Senator Durbin seconded the motion, the Republican leadership apparently claims they didn’t see this one coming, but Senator Durbin told reporters that the Republicans were informed right before Reid’s speech.

UPDATE: 3:27pm: Senator Durbin and Senator Levin are talking to reporters, they have said that the purpose of this closed session is to gain a committment to force a full investigation of the Iraq War’s casus belli, of failures in intelligence. Levin has been saying that this investigation was supposed to start over a year ago, and it needs to begin now Senator Levin argues that he believes the delay is coming because of where the investigation will go, despite a committment that the chair of the Select Intelligence Committee and the Majority Leader signed a pledge to compelte this second phase of the investigation.

On a question of timing, the reason is because the committment was made one year and three months ago before the election that phase two would be conducted after the investigation, today marks one year from the last election, with the promise unmet.

Reporters brought up Republican claims that Democrats were filibustering investigation votes and that there is a draft report. Levin handeled the question immediatley, no draft has been shown to Senator Rockerfeller or other members of the committee, a date has not been announced, and no votes have been made.

On Friday night, Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid suffered a transient ischemic attack, a brief lack of blood to part of the brain and usually the first signs of a stroke to come.

Reid, 65, a gold miner’s son who rose to become one of the nation’s most powerful elected Democrats, saw a doctor in Las Vegas after feeling lightheaded Tuesday evening, aides said Friday. He was told he had experienced a kind of mini-stroke called a transient ischemic attack.

“There are no complications or any restrictions on his activities,” said press secretary Tessa Hafen. “He has undergone evaluations this week, and his doctors have recommended that he take advantage of the summer congressional recess for some down time.”

Let’s keep him and his family in our thoughts.

We need a strategy for John Roberts. As September approaches so to do the confirmation hearings. At this point no strong Democratic opposition or strategy appears to have taken hold on how to deal with Mr. Roberts, and that is a very, very big problem. Of course, detractors will immediately question this statement wondering why waste time and energy on a candidate that seems, well, in the mainstream of conservatism and temperate in his decision making. The answer, I truly believe this is an elaborate set up being played out by the GOP strategists. The likelihood of Bush getting a second Supreme Court appointment is very high, making him a President that can really put a dent on the future of the judiciary. So, as Democrats we need to be considered with the type of choice that is made, and the values we want to protect the most. Unless of course we’re willing to gamble on having sixty Senate seats come January 2007, then by all means don’t worry about this nomination.

However, we’re not going to gain a super-majority, and so we must focus on this nomination as a precursor to the more radical more influential choice to come. What I have written here is a strategy that I think would put us in a good position throughout the confirmation process to ensure our interests.

First, back to my point about Roberts being a precursor. If that is the case, and I and others think that is likely, then a lack of opposition and challenge this time allows Republicans to gain more ammo to combat serious charges of “delay tactics” or “partisan politics” as Bush nominates another Clarence Thomas. Failure to place any opposition on the first candidate makes opposition to the second seem partisan in nature.

So, we know we need to combat the nomination, not defeat it, unless something comes up during the hearings. Essentially we need to rough him up a bit at the least. In order to do that, and to look for any hints of tearing down years of precedent to write his own, Democrats should focus on key areas and tactics.

From this moment forward, every Democrat in the Senate should, when asked if they plan to vote to confirm the Justice respond with a very simple, and ultimately the most honest answer to give: “We haven’t had a single hearing with Judge Roberts and until we do, I think it’s premature to say how I will vote, America hasn’t even gotten to truly meet the man yet.” This answer is simple, factual, and puts in the back of the mind of moderates that we’re being open and sensible, which we are, to the nominee, but not blindly opposing or supporting.

Democrats should also be stating what we believe makes a good Supreme Court justice. What are our standards? Of course, we’re not getting one of our own in, but we should make clear that we hope to have a judge whose respect for the law transcends the tides of politics. Who is careful not to rewrite precedent at every turn, but to use it as a basis for finding solutions, and respect of the individual, their rights, and their protection against government interference, and most of all privacy. I don’t know just how much privacy can be stressed here. It is the most important question, the right to privacy, the presumption of privacy accounts for tenants of progressive law and rights that we enjoy. Without privacy Lawrence would have been decided much differently as would Griswold and Roe to only give a very short list.

Those are the values the Democratic Party should seek in justices, even conservative ones: a respect for the law and precedent and a respect for the rights of the individual, and we must gain the support of the American people. We need to remind Americans that these judicial values are tantamount to many of the freedoms we enjoy today. Getting the support of Americans that this is a type of judge they want Bush to appoint allows us to use that vision to ensure our aims are met.

Next, we need to look at every official memo and argument that comes out, and in the frame of our standards, question these decisions. What we’re doing here is very simple, laying out a middle-ground that we can accept and holding that frame around Roberts and seeing if he fits inside. When Roberts finishes the confirmation hearings, and is ultimately confirmed as I suspect is the case at this point, the American people will have seen a careful scrutiny of the justice without the usual list of dishonest charges from the GOP of stalling, delay tactics, and violating the Constitution. At the end of the month Bush will get his justice, but we’ll get our soap box for his next, more radical choice to come.

The legitimacy of this frame of course, comes from the American people and if they agree that a justice should be those things. Gaining that support allows us not to attack from many different angles, scattered about with no central theme, but to have a repeatable vision and a fair standard to hold Roberts in. Most importantly, as I’ve illustrated, this provides us the perfect ground from which to trap and squash a more radical nominee from the Bush White House, in fact, I think it’s the only ground that we could do that from.

Make no mistake, if we allow Roberts to sail through confirmation, we will have shot ourselves in the foot for years and years to come. The punishment won’t be in the form of electoral defeats, instead it will be in the form of a radical conservative, which gets railroaded over us and placed on the court. A justice that can undo years and years of accomplishments and progressivism in America. That is what is at stake in this confirmation, it has little to do with the man himself at this point, and instead much to do with how we conduct ourselves and how we posture ourselves from the coming fight.

It appears as though Roberts will slide into being an associate justice with little, if any, battle. Gary and I feel that we have all but given up before the battle has even begun. Democrats have not asked the man a single question and its all but decided that nothing is going to be done. The party does not seem to have a position nor does it seem to be searching for one.

As pointed out by some other bloggers, we need to frame the debate in how average lives will be changed by Roberts on the court. As the eminent domain case showed, Americans can care when the cases are shown to have a possible impact on their life. He is no doubt a qualified a man, but the average American seems to take little interest in how this nomination affects their lives. It is true that the politics of the Supreme Court are difficult to get down into 10 words phrases that apply to cases other then Roe vs. Wade, but that doesn’t mean we should have given up already.

Roberts is being lauded as the perfect candidate because he is not scary and ideological. However, he does have an ideology that shapes his decisions and we should be outlining that. As we let this nominee just waltz into his seat, we reinforce the idea that it is a presidential privilege to appoint whomever. This will have lasting ramifications in the coming years as other seats are vacated. I predict that each nominee will be more conservative then the last and it will become harder to fight an unknown future nominee as we so weakly fight this one.

California’s 48th district will be holding a special House election and the article doesn’t mention a single Democrat. After the success of the Hackett campaign it’d be insane of us not to mount a challenge here and accomplish the same result of turning a very red area into contention amid all the anxiety and questioning of the current administration and party.

UPDATE 3:49pm:Over at MyDD there’s more info on the Democratic prospects, there’s two and this is one crowded race.

So, this is for the next Democrat president to sit in the oval office. When the time comes for you to nominate a Supreme Court justice what you should do, is wait until the end of July, right as things are winding down and everyone is going on vacation to announce your choice. Because when you’re on vacation everyone, especially the media, has nothing to report on except how no one is going after your nominee yet, so he must be likable!

Once again Democrats find themselves being bested by a clever marketing campaign by the Bush Administration, just like you don’t sell a new war before Labor Day, why do anything about a Supreme Court justice until after Labor Day, and while on vacation let the media spin him as “not too bad” and a “conservative Democrats may be willing to deal with.”

Look guys, I know vacation is awesome, but we kind of need you to do some work now, ok? I mean who doesn’t think they should get to leave their job for an entire month in August while gas prices rise, a country we invaded is trying to form its government, and the nation faces growing problems every day? I’m not saying I advocate the blocking of Roberts, I’m saying we need to learn a lot about him, and not let a Congressional recess turn this guy into a saint before he’s answered a single question.

Yesterday the Washington Post piece insinuates that we’re not going to put up any fight at all. I really have to take issue with things said in the article, especially some things from our own party:

“No one’s planning all-out warfare,” said a Senate Democratic aide closely involved in caucus strategy on Roberts. For now, the aide said, Democratic strategy is to make it clear Roberts is subject to fair scrutiny while avoiding a pointless conflagration that could backfire on the party. “We’re going to come out of this looking dignified and will show we took the constitutional process seriously,” the aide said.

[Emphasis Mine]

I wish I knew what office this aide works for, because I’d want to see him fired. We have always taken the constitutional process seriously; taking that process seriously requires that we don’t give a rubber stamp to every judge that the President sends over to the Hill, and most certainly not a rubber stamp to a Supreme Court nominee. It is Republicans who haven’t taken the process seriously, demanding nothing but immediate and outright acceptance to nominees with little debate, even to go so far as to attempt to change the rules of the Senate in a completely narrow way to achieve their ends. This aide is completely off base, and I’d like him to tell us just what we’ve done wrong to be undignified and to have disrespected the process.

One person interviewed in this piece does suggest a fight, that’s Lenny Davis, who:

complained that Democrats are avoiding a showdown with Roberts over ideology by fighting over whether documents will be released from Roberts’s time in government. “If they wanted to have a fight on substance they wouldn’t be talking about process,” Davis said. Democrats, he said, have “either folded or procrastinated to the point where it [opposition] won’t have any effect.”

It couldn’t be any more simply stated than that. So back to the lesson, nominate over the summer so people only barely pay attention, and no one in the opposition party forms a response.

At least Senator Reid had some choice words regarding what appears to be Democratic acquiescence.

“All this talk about whether Democrats will support the Roberts nomination is laughably premature. The hearings have not even begun. The White House has so far refused to produce relevant documents, and the documents we have seen raise questions about the nominee’s commitment to progress on civil rights.

John Roberts must still persuade the Senate and the American people that he is a worthy replacement for Justice O’Connor and the jury is still out on that.”

Additionally some Senators, including Kennedy and Leahy have stepped up resistance and responded to the same Washington Post article.

So what’s the bottom line? It’s not that Democrats are ready to simply accept this guy; it’s that we’re taking vacation a little too seriously, you’re still Senators and you have a pretty full time job. Just because Congress is on recess doesn’t mean we get to sit back and let the media and the Republicans paint this picture that we like Roberts. I’m not saying to outright attack him either, well at least not yet The position of the Democratic party should be clear and simple; however, and Democratic senators should support it.

That position should be of detailing what we want to see in a conservative nominee, and where the standards are to be set. It requires us to question every story and document that comes out, always stating that we look forward to the confirmation hearings to learn more about this. Perfect example would be yesterday’s reports of the gender discrimination cases, it’d be great if a Senator on the Judiciary Committee had come forward and said ˜We look forward to letting Judge Roberts clear this up for us, because we have genuine questions on this topic.’ Unless we appear that we’re at least somewhat opposed to the nomination, if for no other reason that our ignorance of the nominee and his positions, well the media can just continue to say that we’re accepting him and not putting up a fight.

I was reading an article in the New York Times Zac sent me regarding the now infamous NARAL advertisement, and there was one paragraph, albeit a bit unrelated, that really struck me.

So far, there is little fire, and this week one Democrat, Senator Mary L. Landrieu of Louisiana, said she was leaning toward supporting the nomination

I’d just like to ask the Senator from Louisiana what she knows that the rest of the Democratic Senate doesn’t. We have yet to ask Judge Roberts a single question, and while I am open-minded about the process and willing to give him a fair chance; I think it’s awfully premature to come out and say you’re leaning toward confirmation before a single hearing has taken place, or before any documents being requested have been released.

I wonder what her intentions were here, the only thing I can imagine is boosting her moderate credentials in a red state, but shouldn’t those moderates wonder what she’s even basing this on? If there are any Louisiana natives reading, maybe you could be so kind as to send your Senator a letter, and ask her why she is ready to confirm a justice that we haven’t even truly met yet.