Originally written as a comment on howieinseattle’s BREAKING: Feingold Accuses Senate Democrats of “Cowering” To Bush diary.
Long story short…why is Senator Feingold doing this? Calling out the obviously deeply entrenched and unmoving centrist, bought-and-sold DemocRatpublican establishment at this time?
Open to discussion.
MY hope…the beginnings of a third party movement.
We shall see.
Read on.
AP story.
By LAURIE KELLMAN
Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) – Wisconsin Sen. Russell Feingold accused fellow Democrats on Tuesday of cowering rather than holding a vote to censure President Bush over domestic spying.
“Democrats run and hide” when the administration invokes the war on terrorism, Feingold told reporters.
Feingold introduced censure legislation Monday in the Senate but not a single Democrat has embraced it. Several have said they want to see the results of a Senate Intelligence Committee investigation before supporting any punitive legislation.
Republicans dismissed the proposal Tuesday as being more about Feingold’s 2008 presidential aspirations than Bush’s actions. On and off the Senate floor, they have dared Democrats to vote for the resolution.
“I’m amazed at Democrats … cowering with this president’s numbers so low,” Feingold said.
The latest AP-Ipsos poll on Bush, conducted last week, found just 37 percent of the 1,000 people surveyed approving his overall performance, the lowest of his presidency.
—snip—
Anybody know for sure what Feingold is up to here? I mean…he IS a professional politician, right? So this simply cannot be a naive expression of shock that the Dems have the spine of a jellyfish. All you need to know about THAT was illustrated by the removal of Howard Dean from contention in the 2004 Presidential election and the subsequent replacement of Small K kerry for Big D Dean.
So…what IS this about?
Did he really think that they would suddenly see the error of their ways?
Please. They’re all making VERY nice livings now, thank you very much. The Constitution? Not an issue. Morality? Nope.
Security. THEIR security particularly. Now there’s an issue.
Does he think that he can drive them leftward by shaming them?
Not likely. If the DemRats had any shame at all they would have strenuously opposed this war and this administration’s march towards media-enforced fascism from the get-go. They would have stood up six years ago when the election was stolen in Florida, and CERTAINLY would have stood up in 2004. But they didn’t.
Bought and sold.
“At long last, have you no shame?”
Nope.
Is this move simply a truly principled stand, no matter WHAT the consequences? Possibly. If so…nice. But a little…quixotic, don’tcha think?
Does he think he can inspire some sort of voter revolt in ’06? Both against the Ratpubs and against the institutionalized system of DemRats?
Maybe.
Is he simply playing classic Dem politics for ’08? Setting himself up as the outsider/dark horse? Getting publicity? (“The Mae West Gambit. “Call me anything, but call me often.” Sorely needed name recognition.) Liberal Dems LOVE a loser. A couple of times they even made them into near winners.
Could be.
Or…and I would LOVE this one…is he setting himself up for some kind of independent run?
Let me ask y’all…has anyone seen even ONE positive reaction from a Dem insider regarding this move?
Hostile or carefully neutral at best, the entire Dem establishment so far.
Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., told reporters he would not comment on the issue while the Democratic leadership mulls the issue. Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., said, “Feingold has a point that he wants to make by introducing that resolution.”
Sen. Debbie Stabenow, D-Mich., said the resolution “raises some very important issues,” but she refused to discuss what they were.
“I think it needs to having hearings, we need to look what exactly what all of that means and give the opportunity for both sides to speak,” she said.
Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada has declined to endorse the resolution and said he hadn’t read it. —snip—
I won’t even mention Senator Loverman’s (D-Beltway) take.
Oh, what the hell.
Yes I will.
Forbes. (Of course…)
“I’d prefer to see us solve the problem,” Lieberman told reporters.
SCOLD!!!???
He oughta be HANGED. (After proper judicial proceedings of course.)
I got yer solution right HERE!!!
But does Russ Feingold?
Have the solution?
Is he thinking of walking away from these cowards?
I hope so.
Even if it were a losing proposition, it would illustrate how far the Democratic Party has fallen over the years since they allowed the Rats to Swift Boat …Hot Lip, really (Loretta Swi[f]t Boat)…Bill Clinton out of position and nearly out of office.
NO MORE DEMOCRATPUBLICANS IN ’08!!!
That’s MY motto.
If Russ sees the truth of the matter…it ought to be his motto too.
Win OR lose, the truth is always a win/win situation.
Go, Russ.
Anyone with the temerity to get up in the Senate of the United States given the current conditions and read from the U.S. Constitution and the Federalist Papers is my kinda fool.
You go, kiddo.
You go.
And…watch your back. Remember Wellstone. Minnesota’s not that far away from Wisconsin. And neither is Milosevic. Pose a REAL threat…like reading from the Constitution in public…and the term extreme prejudice becomes killing words.
Watch yo’se’f. This can turn into a street fight in a quick minute. Big money at stake here. The BIGGEST money. You look like a pretty tough guy. You’re gonna need it.
Good luck.
Later…
AG
Recs?
Comments?
AG
C’mon, folks…let’s get some recommendations up here. Time to beat the drum for this guy.
Let’s talk for a while.
AG
Already gave you one, before I even read this. Like I said yesterday, I’m awake!!!!
Rockin’ on with Sen Russ.
A true leader isn’t afraid to stand alone when it’s time but he won’t stand alone for long.
This is slightly off topic but I wanted you to see the power of people in action, even from a distance.
…lol, I just noticed Jersey Civility. Some concepts are doomed from the start?
Sometimes a civil smack in the mouth is what’s required.
In Jersey OR in DC.
Or any OTHER damned place.
I just ran into Pete Hamill in an airport. One of my models. I NEVER bother celebrities. ANYWHERE. Had to thank him. Brooklyn Irish intellectual artist activist. My kinda folks.
HE’D understand the “civil smack in the mouth” idea.
Sometimes it’s the only way.
Obviously…Russell Feingold understands it too.
GOOD on him!!!
I’d thank HIM if I ran into him somewhere, too.
AG
Call him. Thank him. I am doing it tomorrow…I was in Japan for this whole hubbub (just got back about 4 hours ago with no idea of what was going on), but I am going to call his office first thing tomorrow morning and say that even though I am not a constituent, I fully support him and to keep it up.
Teacher Toni had a great idea, to send him a contribution check, and to send photocopies to other Senators along with a note saying essentially this could be you, if you had a spine….
Nice.
NOW we’re talking.
AG
Good.
It’s on the rec list.
Please…this is not “pimping a diary” here. I’d actually rather go back to sleep ffr a couple of hours. (I may have to anyway…) But…let’s keep it up for a while. This guy needs all the support we can muster.
More recs.
More talking.
AG
Maybe Russ is leading the way for Dems. Sorta like the Senator Cindy Sheehan.
If he can prove the Repubs and the media don’t really have anything to throw at him, and if the publicity just increases his popularity or attention for his position, well…
Just like Cindy, Russ could be the one to break the taboo on what we as “the American People” can discuss openly.
Maybe he’s a martyr and a trendsetter.
the thought has crossed my mind as well, especially considering how closely he’s been working with Bernie Sanders on HIS Senate run.
The thought of the two of them forming the core of a truly independent movement puts a smile on my face.
Thing is, that those two could genuinely do it. I for one would love to see more of these cats actually run as independents.
Having to go it alone when one supposedly has “comrades” has to get tedious after a while. I could easily imagine that Feingold’s patience has finally begun to run out. Compared to me, he has the patience of a saint.
I would have wondered the same thing, Madman, if it were not for that. He has a lot of support, and just might be able to pull it off, but how ironic – 3 war parties.
These people disgust me. The story below disgusts me.
Flush the LOT of ’em down the Senatorial sewage pipes and let’s get someone with some courage in there.
NEW PARTY ’08!!!
” ‘I haven’t read it,’ demurred Barack Obama (Ill.)”
What a piece if shit HE has turned out to be.
“Ill.” inDEED.
Illin’!!!
Read on. (Somewhere near a toilet if possible, because you may get that upchuck feeling. UpChuck Schumer [D-Beltway])
“I haven’t read it,” demurred Barack Obama (Ill.).
“I just don’t have enough information,” protested Ben Nelson (Neb.). “I really can’t right now,” John Kerry (Mass.) said as he hurried past a knot of reporters — an excuse that fell apart when Kerry was forced into an awkward wait as Capitol Police stopped an aide at the magnetometer.
Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.) brushed past the press pack, shaking her head and waving her hand over her shoulder. When an errant food cart blocked her entrance to the meeting room, she tried to hide from reporters behind the 4-foot-11 Barbara Mikulski (Md.).
“Ask her after lunch,” offered Clinton’s spokesman, Philippe Reines. But Clinton, with most of her colleagues, fled the lunch out a back door as if escaping a fire.
In a sense, they were. The cause of so much evasion was S. Res. 398, the resolution proposed Monday by Sen. Russell Feingold (D-Wis.) calling for the censure of President Bush for his warrantless wiretapping program. At a time when Democrats had Bush on the ropes over Iraq, the budget and port security, Feingold single-handedly turned the debate back to an issue where Bush has the advantage — and drove another wedge through his party.
So nonplused were Democrats that even Sen. Charles Schumer (N.Y.), known for his near-daily news conferences, made history by declaring, “I’m not going to comment.” Would he have a comment later? “I dunno,” the suddenly shy senator said.
Republicans were grateful for the gift. The office of Sen. John Cornyn (Tex.) put a new “daily feature” on its Web site monitoring the censure resolution: “Democrat co-sponsors of Feingold Resolution: 0.”
Many of Feingold’s Democratic colleagues agree that Bush abused his authority with the NSA spying program. And they know liberal Democratic activists are eager to see Bush censured, or worse. But they also know Feingold’s maneuver could cost them seats in GOP states.
Hence the elaborate efforts to avoid comment. Five Democratic senators called a news conference yesterday to talk about the Bush budget’s “dangerously irresponsible priorities” — but three of them fled the room before allowing questions. The other two were stuck.
“Was it a good idea for Senator Feingold to bring up this resolution?” came the first question, from CNN’s Ed Henry.
“He brings up some very important issues,” Debbie Stabenow (Mich.) ventured.
Henry was unsatisfied. “So do you support censure, or not?
Stabenow took another stab. “It needs to have hearings,” she said.
Mary Landrieu (La.) pursed her lips. “Senator Feingold has a point that he wants to make,” she said. “We have a point that we want to make, talking about the budget.”
“Senators,” an aide interrupted, “we need to go.”
Next in the Senate TV gallery came Schumer. An aide hung up a poster showing a port. The senator called the ports situation “extremely troubling.” The aide hung up a poster of an Exxon cartoon. “Obscene profits,” decreed Schumer, equally passionately.
CNN’s Henry asked the Feingold question. Schumer ended the news conference.
Outside the Democrats’ lunch downstairs, the senators were similarly agile. The number two Democratic leader, Richard Durbin (Ill.), darted out of an elevator and into lunch when he thought nobody was looking.
“I haven’t made any judgment,” said Jeff Bingaman (N.M.). Two minutes later, he reappeared. “I will support an alternative that would call for an investigation,” he amended.
The one Democrat happy to talk was Feingold, who, in a pre-lunch chat with reporters, seemed to enjoy his colleagues’ squirms. “I’m concerned about the approach Democrats are taking, which is too often cowering,” he said.
Feingold, seeking liberals’ support for the 2008 presidential nomination, said he wasn’t motivated by politics. But then he slipped. “If there’s any Democrat out there who can’t say . . . the president has no right to make up his own laws, I don’t know if that Democrat really is the right candidate,” he said of his likely primary opponents.
After an hour of closed-door negotiations, Democrats were no closer to resolving the Feingold rift.
“Most of us feel at best it’s premature,” announced Sen. Christopher Dodd (Conn.). “I don’t think anyone can say with any certainty at this juncture that what happened is illegal.”
Dodd must not have checked with Sen. Tom Harkin (Iowa). “The president broke the law and he needs to be held accountable,” he said. “Talk about high crimes and misdemeanors!” Harkin said he’ll vote for the Feingold resolution — if it comes up.
That gives Feingold two solid votes, including his own. The rest: avowedly undecided.
Schumer, leaving the lunch, still hadn’t found his voice. ” He’s gonna talk about it,” Schumer said, pointing to Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid (Nev.).
Reporters, as instructed, asked Reid where he stood. “It’s a question that’s been asked 33 times in the last few hours,” he said. “And so, for the 34th time, I’m going to say the same thing: I’m going to wait . . .”
Time for a change.
Before it’s too late.
NEW PARTY ’08!!!
FIGHT!!!
FOR YOUR RIGHT!!!
TO A PAAARTY!!!
AG
I like this.
From what I have read about him, I am really impressed, especially w/his stance re: single payer health care.
And, I would LOVE to see a Feingold candidacy. It seems to me that the only way that would be possible would be for him to run as an independent.
I’d work for his campaign, w/o hesitation.
Go for it!
Gettin’ near that time, don’tcha think?
Is this the image that can do it?
He not only LOOKS tough…he has proven by years of lonely, unsupported, conscience-driven voting that he IS tough. And he has still managed to stay in office. Good politician, too.
Let us pray.
Or continue to be preyed upon.
AG
A “good” politician?
A visionary politician. And I mean POLITICS.
As in “how to win”.
Read on.
Wikipedia:
Senate
Feingold’s senatorial career began in 1992 with a surprising victory over incumbent Republican Senator Bob Kasten. Feingold, who had little name recognition in the state and was campaigning in a primary against a pair of millionaire opponents, adopted several proposals to gain the electorate’s attention. The most memorable of these was a series of five promises written on Feingold’s garage door in the form of a contract. These were:
1. I will rely on the Wisconsin citizens for most of my contributions.
2. I will live in Middleton, Wisconsin. My children will go to school here and I will spend most of my time here in Wisconsin.
3. I will accept no pay raise during my six-year term in office.
4. I will hold a “Listening Session” in each of Wisconsin’s 72 counties each year of my six-year term in office.
5. I will hire the majority of my Senate staff from individuals who are from Wisconsin or have Wisconsin backgrounds.
Also much-noted was Feingold’s advertising campaign, which was widely compared to that used by progressive candidate Paul Wellstone in his victorious Senate campaign in Minnesota. Shot in the form of home movies, the ads attempted to portray Feingold, who always referred to himself as “the underdog running for U.S. senate,” as a down-to-earth, Capra-esque figure, taking the audience on a guided tour of the candidate’s heavily-mortgaged home and introducing them to his children, all of whom were enrolled in public school.
The ads also contained a significant amount of humor. One featured Feingold meeting with a faux Elvis Presley, who offered Feingold his endorsement. (Bob Kasten responded to the Elvis endorsement with an advertisement featuring an Elvis impersonator attacking Feingold’s record.) Another showed Feingold, standing next to a pair of half-sized cardboard cut-outs of his opponents, refusing to “stoop to their level” as the two were shown literally slinging mud at one another. In still another, Feingold was shown conclusively demonstrating that there were no skeletons in any of his closets.
During the primary campaign, Feingold unveiled an 82-point plan to eliminate the deficit by the end of his first term. The plan, which called for, among other things, a raise in taxes and cuts in the defense budget, was derided as “extremist” by Republicans and “too liberal” by his Democratic opponents. Feingold also announced his support for strict campaign finance reform and a national health care system and voiced his opposition to term limits and new tax cuts.
On primary day, Feingold, whose support had shown in the single digits throughout much of the campaign, stunned observers by surging to victory with 70% of the vote. With only seven weeks before the election, the momentum created by this upset win, along with support from people who came out to vote for presidential candidates Bill Clinton and Ross Perot, allowed Feingold to beat Kasten by 6% on election day.
During his 1998 re-election campaign, Feingold once again eschewed big-money campaigning, despite the fact that the National Republican Senatorial Committee had targeted him for defeat. Feingold placed a cap on his own fundraising, refusing to raise or spend more than $3.8 million (one dollar for every citizen of Wisconsin) during the campaign. In addition, he placed the same limits on his fundraising that he would have faced under the McCain-Feingold bill. He refused to allow his party to raise any soft money to air ads favoring him and he requested that several special interest groups, including the AFL-CIO and the League of Conservation Voters, refrain from airing pro-Feingold “issue ads.” His Republican opponent, Congressman Mark Neumann, also limited himself to $3.8 million in spending, but allowed soft money to be used in his favor by a variety of pro-Republican groups. On election day, an extraordinarily strong showing in the Democratic strongholds of Milwaukee and Madison allowed Feingold to win by less than one percent of the vote.
In the 2004 Senate election, Feingold defeated the Republican candidate, construction magnate Tim Michels, by 12% (56%-44%), earning a third term. During the campaign, Feingold refrained from imposing spending caps on himself as he had in the past, and raised and spent almost $11 million. Although Republicans attempted to use that fact to paint him as a hypocrite, Feingold’s records showed that more than 90% of the money came from individuals, that the average contribution was only $60, and that, once again, a majority of it was raised from Wisconsin residents [2]. Feingold’s victory was seen by many pundits as a vindication of the many controversial stances that he had taken during his second term, as it was by far his largest electoral victory thus far. Feingold even won many counties which also supported the re-election of Republican President George W. Bush.
Senator Feingold regularly holds what he refers to as “listening sessions” in all 72 Wisconsin counties to listen to his constituents’ concerns, and has held more than 850 since he was elected to office.
Perhaps as a result of his success in the 2004 elections, in late December 2004, Feingold was appointed to be one of four deputy whips for the Senate Democrats. Feingold has pledged that the new role would not sway his maverick stance within the party or the chamber.
THIS guy can THINK!!!
Politically.
Check him out…
AG
Good.
It’s on the rec list.
Please…this is not “pimping a diary” here. I’d actually rather go back to sleep for a couple of hours. (I may have to anyway…) But…let’s keep it up for a while. This guy needs all the support we can muster.
More recs.
More talking.
AG
C’mon, folks…let’s get some recommendations up here. Time to beat the drum for this guy.
Let’s talk for a while.
AG
Gave you a rec, Arthur. I have been beating the drum for Russ for over 6 months now.
He gets it.
He’s principled.
He’s smart.
And, he’s likable, which is FAR more important than being ‘electable’.
I know you recced this, ejmw, and I think you for it.
There are five now. I just want get it up on the rec list so that people will notice it. I probably should have posted it so that it didn’t hit late at night in the US, but I am in Europe now, jetlagged and overtraveled/overworked to the point that I am simply sleeping and eating on some cosmic uberschedule.
Whatever…it would be nice to be able to add a little to the growing drumbeat.
I think that what he has done here will turn out to have been a political masterstroke.
The Path of Blame.
We shall see.
AG
a political masterstroke…The Path of Blame.
Seems to me, if that is what it is, he would have to run as an independent, in light of the lack of support from the damn dems.
Gotta just wait it out and see how it all plays out.
For what it’s worth, someone out in the Mojave desert area of California (one of my favorite stretches of CA – but then again I am something of a desert rat) has a blog that is basically a petition urging Feingold to run for prez in 2008. Maybe it’ll go some place, maybe not.
No doubt in my mind that he’d be a very strong candidate in terms of offering a legitimate alternative to the status quo in DC, who can offer a simple, straightforward, and (as politicians go) principled message. Works for me.
Oh…he’s ALREADY “running”. NO doubt about THAT.
But…on which track?
That’s the question.
AG
I’m sure if he runs as a Dem, the party brass will definitely throw in everything but the kitchen sink into scuttling his campaign before it ever gets started. I’m willing to bet my life’s savings (all five cents) on that.
Yup.
Thus the third party idea.
AG
I do know that if he does choose the independent route, he will face some tangible obstacles when it comes to getting on the ballot in many of the states. Oklahoma, where I live, is especially unfriendly to indies and 3rd parties. That said, I’ll gladly volunteer to circulate petitions etc. if he does go the Indy route.
I think by the time it comes around, the dem party might be persuaded to support Russ. If not, it could be a terminal error. That’s all still a matter of many twists and turns. The grassroots money will be a deciding factor in several ways.
How many “terminal errors” are these assholes ALLOWED?
They are already “terminal”.
They have ARRIVED at the terminal.
Their destination.
“PermaGov Central!!! Last stop before Armageddonville!!! All aboard!!!”
Let’s get off the fucking train.
NOW!!!
AG
I suspect a great deal will rest on how progressive/liberal D’s do in the midterms. If Chuck P could oust Casey in PA for example…I know, snowballs in hell and all that…plus whatever others there might be out there were to win, it would seriously alter the CW of the party regulars…
and if Dean throws the weight of the DNC netroots/grassroots behind him it could get very interesting.
I’d sure as hell support him over any of the others being touted.
Peace
Does he have what it takes to bring the reluctant “fringe” of the Democratic party, either within or without it, around to a more mainstream view on expanding the crusade to Iran, and of course, US-funded crimes against humanity in Palestine?
These are hot button issues for some of his most ardent supporters, who understandably focus on other aspects, such as his vote against the Patriot Act, and most recently, his call to censure Bush.
Will he be able to rally them sufficiently to trade off the crusades, including Palestine, in exchange for some strongly-worded anti-Bush statements, and even more strongly-worded statements that are in accord with their position on other issues?
I do not fully understand your question.
What do you mean by “a more mainstream view on expanding the crusade to Iran, and of course, US-funded crimes against humanity in Palestine?”
Which “mainstream”?
What do you mean by “trade off the crusades, including Palestine?”
WHICH “ardent supporters”?
Be more specific.
Please.
Pull no punches.
We’ve got to talk about everything.
AG
Senator Feingold is strongly committed to US policy in the Levant, specifically regarding Israel.
He has also had on his website for some time, a very no-nonsense statement on the subject of the danger he feels Iran presents to both the US and Israel.
As you are aware, US operations in Iran will decoverticize very shortly.
Any politician, of any party, including Feingold, cannot afford to leave him or herself vulnerable to charges that he or she does not support the war on terror.
It is not realistic to suppose that any candidate can gain support of mainstream Democratic voters without a strong pro war on terror position, and strong support for US policy regarding Israel.
At the same time, Feingold enjoys a great deal of popularity with that segment of voters who consider themselves Democrats, but who do not agree with either the crusade, or “war on terror,” and are strongly opposed to Operation Iranian Freedom.
This same sector also tends to oppose US policies regarding Israel.
Will that sector, and many people who post here are among them, be willing to make the necessary compromises in their own positions, and agree to if not support, at least tolerate, Operation Iranian Freedom and the continued US-funded crimes against humanity in Palestine, in exchange for having a candidate whose positions on other issues they do strongly support?
Only one way to find out…
Give it a try.
i am not sure about this one.
‘Any politician, of any party, including Feingold, cannot afford to leave him or herself vulnerable to charges that he or she does not support the war on terror. It is not realistic to suppose that any candidate can gain support of mainstream Democratic voters without a strong pro war on terror position, and strong support for US policy regarding Israel.”
One can REDEFINE “the war on terror.”
WHICH “terror?”
Why ARE there “terrorists?”
Are they simply implicitly evil people?
Or are they people whose backs are to the wall?
Lots of room for debate, here. If only someone with some courage was willing to take the chance of publicly bringing them up.
And…what ABOUT “Israel”?
Maybe THEY are wrong, to some large degree. Not about wanting to survive. Only about how they approaching the problem.
Again…these things MUST be brought up.
Is this the person who will do it?
Effectively?
Dennis Kucinich in a bomber jacket?
Could be…
AG
It’s about presentation, Arthur.
It may look like the same green TV over Teheran that we all saw with Iran, but if someone could be found who could Redefine it in the right way, there might not be a single protest march!
If he can pull it off right, even Al Jazeera will have the good taste not to show burned Iranian children. Because it will all be Redefined. Presentation is key, Arthur, KEY!
Same with Palestine. Redefine “extrajudicial assasinations” Redefine tanks firing at little boys with rocks, home demolitions, starvation, mutilation, torture – there’s another one that will need some big time Redefinition.
Political genius, that’s what it’ll take. Maybe he’s got it, party unity ticket, maybe with your Hil as VP?
I think it could work, this Redefinition.
Maybe not so much outside the US, but as someone pointed out in 2004, Iraqis – and for 2008 we’ll add Iranians, can’t vote.
It is NOT about “presentation”. It’s about understanding. That is what seems (so far) to set this man apart.
Your snark is way off base, here.
Or else I am way badly informed.
Enlighten me.
Is Feingold a proponent of child killing?
In the name of Israel?
Is that what you are getting at?
Could be.
Show me.
And your constant harping on “my Hillary” is getting tiresome.
I think that she is a master politician.
I STILL think that she will win the Democratic ticket, and I think that she stands a damned good chance of becoming President. I also think that her heart is in the right place on many issues.
But she is NOT “my Hillary”, and here’s why.
Because in BEING a master politician…a master player of the game…she has had to make too many compromises. And she will owe too many debts to the wrong people. Which is why I supported the outsider last time…Dean (and look where THAT got us)…and why I support Feingold now.
I get the impression that you are carrying some large load of anger at something about which you refuse to speak directly, AND I ENCOURAGE YOU TO STOP BEING SO CIRCUMSPECT AND COME ON OUT WITH IT.
Do you really think that this man is in the redefinition of murder business? Is it his Jewishness that bothers you? Is he some Mossad plant come to further the evil Zionist plot to rule the world? Is that what’s bothering you, Bunky? If so…come on out of your shell and prove it.
If not…what the fuck ARE you saying? You spin around the edges of making sense, of speaking plainly, but at the last minute you always seem to make a little mysterious detour.
What’s your point, DuctapeFatwah?
Have you got a beef with Feingold?
Great.
WHAT IS IT?
I’m no Feingold scholar.
Ttell me what I’m missing.
AG
For Arthur, On Russ Feingold, Redefining, Understanding, and…
Good.
It’s on the rec list.
Please…this is not “pimping a diary” here. I’d actually rather go back to sleep fofr a couple of hours. (I may have to anyway…) But…let’s keep it up for a while. This guy needs all the support we can muster.
More recs.
AG
I’m bringing around some other articles to give folks an idea of what Sen Feingold has had to say.
Thank you, rumi.
3et’s keep talking.
I’m off to bed for an hour or so…jetlag calls its siren song, and the flesh iust obey.
Later…
AG
He spends a lot of time out in the communities listening to people. He has to know the value of compromise when it’s the reasonable answer. Hell, all most of us want is someone with common sense and integrity…not perfection. But you already knew that.
Here’s an older one, but interesting
Official Title of Legislation:
HR 2709: To impose certain sanctions on foreign persons who transfer items contributing to Iran’s efforts to acquire, develop, or produce ballistic missiles.
Project Vote Smart’s Synopsis:
Vote to pass a bill that would impose sanctions on individuals, companies, or research labs that give or transfer ballistic missile technology to Iran.