Meet the Next President: Russ Feingold

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

As the only senator to have voted against the Patriot Act and the only presidential hopeful to have voted against the Iraq war, Russ Feingold is sometimes tempted to say “I told you so.”

“Yeah, but I was taught it’s impolite to do that,” the Wisconsin liberal tells The Examiner in an interview. “And it also doesn’t help you get where you want to go.”

The White House is where Feingold wants to go. He is counting on his consistent opposition to the Iraq war to get him there.

“He is, I think, the one Democrat who can say he’s 100 percent pure,” says columnist David Yepsen of the Des Moines Register.

Indeed, Feingold has become the left’s dark horse candidate in a contest crowded with Democrats who at least initially supported the war, including senators Hillary Rodham Clinton, John Kerry and John Edwards.

“People are prepared to live with a good candidate who says ‘I was wrong’ after the fact,” Feingold says. “But I think people would strongly prefer a candidate who had the judgment that’s right in the first place.

“They want somebody who stood up to the mistake of the Iraq war from the beginning. And I’m the only one — even on the long list — who actually voted against the Iraq war.”

From the outset, Feingold expressed skepticism about President Bush’s arguments that Saddam Hussein was linked to al-Qaida and had amassed stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction. In the years since, the stockpiles have not been found and the al-Qaida links have been disputed.

“I was the first member of the Senate to get on the floor and say, wait a minute, I don’t buy this connection to al Qaida,” Feingold recalls. “I don’t find the case on WMD, in terms of being an imminent threat, to be persuasive.

“I just had this sick feeling that people were buying into this out of fear, rather than rationality,” he adds. “I was so extremely opposed to the Iraq war — I was certain it was the wrong call.”

In August 2005, Feingold called for U.S. troops to leave Iraq by Dec. 31, becoming the first senator to advocate a specific timetable for withdrawal. Since then, many other Democrats — including Kerry and Edwards — have embraced withdrawal timetables.

Feingold hopes his willingness to take the lead on such thorny issues will pay political dividends in 2008.

“I mean, this is about being elected president,” he says. “And in the end, being president involves judgment.”

Feingold says Clinton, the early favorite for the Democratic presidential nomination, is “absolutely” too timid on the Iraq war issue. Unlike Feingold, the New Yorker voted for the war in 2002 and now opposes a timetable for withdrawing U.S. troops.

Feingold calls this “the wrong approach” and says it will make it harder for Clinton to win the Democratic primaries, which are dominated by liberal voters.

“Given some of the feelings among the grass roots of the Democratic Party, it’s certainly not a sure thing,” he says of a Clinton nomination.

“And I don’t know if I’m going to run, but I guarantee you, I wouldn’t choose not to run because I don’t think I can defeat her. If it was one-on-one, given the issues that I’ve taken, I think I’d have a shot. It would be an upset, but I’ve been out there in many, many states and people are looking for an alternative,” he adds. “There are a lot of people out there that want to have some choices here and I think they’re willing to vote accordingly.”

On the other hand, Feingold might be playing right into Clinton’s hands, according to Charlie Cook, publisher of the Cook Political Report.

“I’m not sure that Sen. Clinton minds someone running around saying she’s not liberal enough, that she’s too much of a centrist,” Cook says. “At the end of the day, the question is whether there really are a lot of liberals that won’t fall in behind her, behind the first woman to ever have a realistic chance of becoming president.”

While Feingold was one of 23 senators to vote against authorization of the Iraq war in October 2002, he was the only senator — from either party — to vote against the Patriot Act in October 2001. The move, regarded by some as a career ender at the time, is now seen by liberals as a career booster.

“We clearly did need a bill that had many of the provisions of the USA Patriot Act,” Feingold recalls. “But there were several provisions in there that were just plain overreaching.

“Yet the Democratic leadership, along with the White House, said no. No changes. And I tried that night to offer amendments, but I was allowed only a few minutes in a very rushed setting. The process was shut down in a way that I thought was irresponsible and really reckless in terms of our responsibilities as a Senate.”

So Feingold decided to oppose the bill on the Senate floor.

“When I went down to the well, I didn’t know what they were going to call it,” he says. “Then I saw that it was being called the USA Patriot Act. So I gulped a bit and realized I was going to be the only one who voted no.”

Afterward, Feingold was shocked to receive a standing ovation at an appearance in one of Wisconsin’s most conservative counties. To this day, he receives such ovations when he is introduced at political events throughout the country.

http://www.examiner.com/printa-293244~Meet...t_he_wants.html

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I'm guessing the selection process for the Dems candidate will be as dirty as the subsequent general election. The smear campaigns in 2004 that both parties ran on were despicable.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Smear campaigns have value. They show how candidates react when attacked. I want to know that before I push that button for someone for President. I want to know they can fight dirty and not pull punches. I have a feeling I am going to like the way Hillary campaigns

[Fandango 1,439]

Gotta say, I'm no Dem, but I respect this man moreso than every other prominant Dem who has used their supporters' general stupidity and a very selective memory so they can justify straddling both sides of a very wide fence.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Gotta say, I'm no Dem, but I respect this man moreso than every other prominant Dem...

Yes, Russ is definitely more worthy of respect than most Senators on either side of the aisle. But is he Presidential? I don't know, he sounds way too "nice" to be President. JMHO.

[Dr_LHA 3]

Just as long as we don't get any more lame duck candidates for president like we have for the last 2 elections. I shudder at the thought of talk of Gore running again for the dems.

Can we get some charismatic candidates for the next election please?

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

I hear Mayor Bloomberg wants to run as an Independent.

Oh wait, you wanted charismatic. Scratch that.

[Ban Hammer 13,345]

Just as long as we don't get any more lame duck candidates for president like we have for the last 2 elections. I shudder at the thought of talk of Gore running again for the dems.

Can we get some charismatic candidates for the next election please?

yeah, where is bob dole?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Gotta say, I'm no Dem, but I respect this man moreso than every other prominant Dem...

Yes, Russ is definitely more worthy of respect than most Senators on either side of the aisle. But is he Presidential? I don't know, he sounds way too "nice" to be President. JMHO.

I don't know, they scraped the barrel with GWB…. He might look the part, he might read the speeches well, but the numerous candid interviews he's participated in over the last 6 years reveals a man who clearly doesn't have a grasp on the issues that his office requires him to render an opinion on.

It's not about whether or not he speaks well (although there is a definite correlation between being a good orator and being an effective politician) but whether he has a grasp on the issues. I've seen enough to question that. Compared to the likes of Tony Blair, who has been criticised for his lack of honest or political integrity, you have to give the guy credit that he does at least demonstrate that he understands a particular issue - even if the answer he gives is complete B/S.

I don't think Hillary winning will make much of a difference. She's a panderer IMO, and far less "liberal" that people claim her to be. After the current insanity, someone a little more pragmatic and honest will be preferable to yet another authoritarian.

[almaty 19]

Just as long as we don't get any more lame duck candidates for president like we have for the last 2 elections. I shudder at the thought of talk of Gore running again for the dems.

Can we get some charismatic candidates for the next election please?

yeah, where is bob dole?

admiring his manhood..thanks to viagra...

[Ban Hammer 13,345]

Just as long as we don't get any more lame duck candidates for president like we have for the last 2 elections. I shudder at the thought of talk of Gore running again for the dems.

Can we get some charismatic candidates for the next election please?

yeah, where is bob dole?

admiring his manhood..thanks to viagra...

you mean monica might have a job again in the white house?

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

yeah, where is bob dole?

admiring his manhood..thanks to viagra...

you mean monica might have a job again in the white house?

Bob Dole is a Republican.. he has got to have better taste in women than that

[almaty 19]

Just as long as we don't get any more lame duck candidates for president like we have for the last 2 elections. I shudder at the thought of talk of Gore running again for the dems.

Can we get some charismatic candidates for the next election please?

yeah, where is bob dole?

admiring his manhood..thanks to viagra...

you mean monica might have a job again in the white house?