Russ Feingold for President

My new blog

2007-06-15T18:16:00.000-07:00

I finally decided to start a new blog. It's called Still Going Forward and can be found here. I hope anyone who is still visiting here or just stumble across this place will check it out.

Thank you.

So long, and thanks for all the hits...

2006-11-12T20:52:00.000-08:00

As you have probably heard by now, Senator Feingold has decided not to run for President. You can read his statement here and a good article about it here.

As many of you can guess, I'm pretty disappointed by this. As my last real blog post made clear, supporting Russ Feingold wasn't just about the war, or civil liberties, or fair trade, or campaign finance reform, as much as I care about those issues. It was about who Russ Feingold was. Despite being a legislator in the (until last Tuesday!) minority party, he is a leader. He is a man of vision, courage, and integrity.

Simply put, the reason I worked as hard for him as I did wasn't just that I liked his positions. It's becuase I knew that, if elected, he would not let me down. That's a pretty rare quality for a leader. Honestly, in my lifetime I can only think of a few other individuals I could say that about, and they are mostly either dead (Senators Paul Simon and Paul Wellstone, Governor Mel Carnahan) or fictional characters (President Josiah Bartlet, Captain Jean-Luc Picard).

Who's left that's alive and real? No one who might run. Bill Bradley seems to be done with politics. Howard Dean has promised he won't run since he's DNC Chair. Dick Durbin seems to think the other senator from Illinois is better suited for the Oval Office than he is.

So, yeah I'm disappointed. I wanted someone to run who I knew wouldn't let me down.

And I wanted someone who would challenge the conventional wisdom.

I was born nine months after Ronald Reagan was inaugurated, and it seems like Reagan has defined the entire political landscape for the whole time I've been alive. Government is bad. Politicians can't be trusted. America can't solve it's domestic problems, so just ignore them. The suffering of your fellow Americans doesn't matter. That's the Reagan-Bush philosophy, and somedays it feels like it's been tacitly accepted by too many Americans.

And when Democrats nominate moderate candidates, they don't challenge that philosophy. Moderate Democrats are definitely better than Republicans, but they aren't going to achieve the goal I want. The goal I want is greater than getting the U.S. out of Iraq. The goal I want is greater than raising the minimum wage. The goal I want is greater than preserving our civil liberties.

What I want to see is a New Progressive Era in American politics. Let's challenge those Reagan-Bush assumptions. Let's get Americans to believe in themselves and their government again. Let's apply all our abilities to solving the problems facing this nation.

So, I can't say I'm excited by the prospect of hearing the Democratic candidates talk about their programs for tax credits for job creation. Yes, that's a good thing...but it's not big enough. And as the great architect Daniel Burnham once said, "Make no little plans. They have no magic to stir men's blood, and probably will not be themselves realized."

Russ Feingold's campaign would have had the magic that would stir men's blood. Russ Feingold's campaign could have led to a New Progressive Era.

Win or lose, Russ Feingold's campaign would have, in the words of Leo McGarry, "raise[d] the level of public debate in this country, and let that be [it's] legacy."

But it's not to be.

I could say good things about all of the remaining potential 2008 Democratic candidates. And I could say bad things about all of them. Instead, I'll say nothing. For now, I'm just a spectator in that race. Perhaps, somebody will suprise me. Perhaps, the conventional wisdom will still be flouted. I hope so.

So that's pretty much it.

Except for this. The title of this post isn't just because I thought it would be fun to put a Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy reference in here. I mean it.

Thank you to everyone who has read this blog; especially those who read it regularly. It meant so much to me to know I wasn't alone. And especially those who went on to start their own Feingold blogs or sites; especially ilya s., fitzy, and the whole RunRussRun.com steering committee. Thanks to Tony Palmeri and Roger Simon, for giving me the chance to see my name in the paper. And thanks to my friends and family who read this, and were still willing to admit they knew me.

I'm kicking around the idea of maybe starting another political blog. Not for a candidate, just for my thoughts. I might do that after Thanksgiving, or after my finals. I hope you folks will check it out if I do.

So, farewell, fellow Feingold fans. I guess we won't be going Forward with Feingold after all...but I hope you all keep doing whatever you can to move America Forward!

Best Wishes,

Daniel R. Kuehnert

Why Not the Best?: A Rededication

2006-11-09T20:51:00.000-08:00

I’ve been working on this blog for about 23 months now. I haven’t been able to work on it regularly. It’s been difficult to fit in at times, first with my job, and now with law school. But I’ve tried to keep it up, and I’ve encouraged others to start their own Feingold blogs and websites. Now, I want to explain to readers new and old why, exactly, I’ve been blogging in support of a dark horse candidate for the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination since December of 2004.

I could begin my story back when I first started the blog. Or earlier than that, back in 1999, when I first heard about Senator Feingold and his campaign finance reform efforts. But I think the story actually begins earlier than that. It begins one day when I was in study hall in high school.

I liked to spend study hall in the library, so if I got bored with my homework I could look at the books. I especially liked looking at the biographies, and one day, I don’t remember when, I came across a paperback copy of Jimmy Carter’s 1976 campaign autobiography: “Why Not the Best?” I don’t know if I ever read the whole book, and I don’t remember much about it, but the title always stuck in my head. I think it is the only question people should ask when choosing their leaders: “Why not the best?”

And that’s why I was disappointed after Election Day 2004, when all the talking heads began chattering about possible 2008 Democratic candidates. They described various candidates in terms of their name recognition, their fundraising, and their perceived electability. But nobody talked about why these potential candidates make be good presidents. Nobody seemed to be asking the question “Why not the best?”

And that’s a problem because no matter how important it may be for obtaining the office, being President of the United States is not about courting big donors. Being President of the United States is not about being all things to all people. Being President of the United States is not about being able to get 50.1% of the vote in a swing state.

Being President of the United States is about vision. It’s about courage. It’s about integrity. It requires the best. And that is why I’ve been blogging in support of Senator Feingold for 23 months. Because he has what it takes to not only be elected president, but to be a great president.

Vision.

Senator Feingold was one of less than two dozen senators who had the vision to vote against going to war in Iraq. And He was the only senator to see the danger in giving President Bush everything he wanted in the PATRIOT Act. Senator Feingold has a vision of an America that protects itself from terrorists while also protecting the liberties that have defined the United States the land of the free.

Senator Feingold had the foresight to oppose corporate-friendly “free trade” agreements like NAFTA and CAFTA that have hurt workers here and in our neighboring countries. And Senator Feingold has a vision of creating a global economy that works for everyone.

As soon as Senator Feingold arrived in Washington, D.C., he saw the stranglehold that big donors and lobbyists had on the political process. And he has constantly worked to fight for campaign finance and lobbying reform. Senator Feingold has a vision of an America where the government works for the public interest, not the special interests.

Courage.

Senator Feingold was alone in the Senate, opposing the PATRIOT Act. He was in a small minority in the Senate, opposing the Iraq War. He was the first senator to propose censuring President Bush because of his illegal wiretapping program. Senator Feingold has not been afraid to stand up to an Administration that is willing to stop at nothing to destroy those who oppose it; as Max Cleland and John Kerry can attest to.

Of course, the pundits wrote Senator Feingold off because of his courage. They thought it was “political suicide” to oppose the PATRIOT Act and the war. Well, Senator Feingold has survived “political suicide” so many times, he must have more lives than a cat. In 2004, Senator Feingold was reelected by his largest margin of victory: the people of Wisconsin know courage when they see it.

And courage doesn’t just mean standing up the Republicans, it requires standing up to members of his own party when he disagrees with them. Senator Feingold angered Tom Daschle as much as George Bush when he stood up to speak out against the PATRIOT Act. Senator Feingold was the only Democratic senator to vote against dismissing the impeachment charges against President Clinton without hearing the evidence first. That move didn’t win him many friends in his own party, but he thought it was the right thing to do…and that leads to…

Integrity.

Senator Feingold has won the respect of his Republican colleagues like Orrin Hatch and John McCain by being a man of integrity; staying true to his word and his principles. In 1998, when he ran for reelection, he refused to let the Democratic Party spend soft money for him, instead following the rules he proposed in a campaign finance bill that had not yet passed. Senator Feingold will not accept a pay raise during his six-year term, instead returning the money to the U.S. Treasury. And that is but one of five promises Senator Feingold made to the people of Wisconsin on his garage door in 1991, and has kept ever since then.

I know that to some people it is not enough that Senator Feingold would be a great president. It is not enough that he is a man of vision, courage and integrity. All they care about is one question: will he win?

I don’t know. I don’t possess a crystal ball, a deck of tarot cards, a time machine, or any other device that allows me to see the future. But I think he can win.

I think he can win because he has been elected to the Senate three-times from the Midwestern swing state of Wisconsin-the most average state in the nation according to a recent study-and he won it in 2004 with a much large percentage of the vote than John Kerry received.

I think he can win because Election Day 2006 saw dozens of victories for Democratic candidates who share Senator Feingold’s values of fighting terrorism while protecting civil liberties; of making the global economy work for everybody; and of making the government work for the public interest, not the special interests.

And I think he can win because I believe Americans are tired of voting out of fear. Republicans win by feeding on our fears of the worst that could happen. But Americans rejected that on Tuesday. Americans want to vote for something, and they want to vote for the best. They want to vote for a man of vision, courage, and integrity who will spend everyday he’s in office working for the public interest.

And that’s why I’ve been running this blog for 23 months.

Because I believe Americans want the best, and I believe it is the duty of the Democratic Party to offer it to them.

And because I still firmly believe, as I wrote over a year ago, that working together we, the people of the United States of America, can move our country and the world forward towards new horizons of opportunity, justice and peace.

So, once again, I say: Let’s go forward together! Let’s go forward with Feingold!

Run, Russ, Run!: Taking it to the Next Level

2006-11-09T17:15:00.000-08:00

Well, Election Day has come and gone, and what a day it was! I'll blog some more about that soon, and what I think it means for the Feingold for President movement.

Meanwhile, WFRV in Green Bay has a report on Senator Feingold's response to the election:

Sen. Russ Feingold said he's closer to making a decision on a presidential racefollowing this week's congressional elections, but still hasn't decided if theelection results have made him more or less likely to run for president.

Meanwhile, a great group of Feingold for President grassrooters has formed a wonderful new website to help make Senator Feingold's decision a little bit easier. The site is called runrussrun.com. If you want to find out more about it, the initial diary that launched it follows:

Announcing RussForPresident 3.0
by hoose, Thu Nov 09, 2006 at 10:25:13 AM
EST

There have been a lot of posts in a lot of places mentioning vague developments for the "Draft Russ Feingold" movement in the near future. Well,it's November 9th, we own the Congress, and "Daffy" Donald Rumsfeld is an unpleasant memory. In other words the future is here.

Click here to beat the crowd and sign up at RunRussRun.com.

We're very pleased to announce the launch of RunRussRun.com, which replaces RussForPresident.com as the national headquarters of the Draft Feingold for President movement.

Click here to sign up at RunRussRun.com.

The new site was developed by Internet activists from 16 states and 5 national constituency groups. We looked very carefully at what worked and what didn't in our state-level organizations, our former national site, and previous presidential draft movements. Emerging technology helped us solve most of the problems we saw, emphasize what worked best, and open up what we think is a new kind of site for on-line activism.

Click here to sign up at RunRussRun.com.

RunRussRun.com gives members access to a wide array of services including:a customized activism road map, interaction with other members across the country, and direct access to free tools for building local and state-level groups and activities. It also features up-to-the-minute news from the Feingold for President state and community blogs, discussion forums, and an option to pledge donations to a future Feingold presidential campaign.

The effort to convince Senator Feingold to make a presidential run traces back to December, 2004 when the first Russ Feingold for President blog was started by current Washington University law student Daniel Kuehnert. Since then, the effort has grown to include 16 state blogs and numerous nationwide sites, including RussForPresident.com, which was founded in February 2005 by University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point student Matthew Wallock. Steering Committee member, Minnesota resident and political activist Joel Clemmer, says "The movement has grown tremendously and needs a new face for the final push. Our goal over the next few months is to double our membership and bring at least five more states on line."

Add your voice to the movement: sign up at RunRussRun.com today.

Run, Russ, Run! Let's go Forward with Feingold!

Three Days to Go

2006-11-03T20:50:00.000-08:00

As you probably guessed from the lack of updates, I've found the second year of law school provides no more opportunities for free time (and therefore blogging time) than the first year...actually it seems like less, if that's possible. I wish I had the time over the past few months to update this blog with the latest in Feingold related news, and I hope that in the weeks to come I'll have some exciting Feingold for President stuff to blog about.

But none of that matters now. Now, we only have three days to go until election day 2006, and until that's done 2008 presidential race speculation is definitely on the backburner.

It looks like these midterms will be pretty exciting for the Democrats, but we shouldn't take anything for granted. So, my simple plea is this: spend the next three days doing whatever you can to help Democratic candidates and progressive causes in the upcoming election. If that's giving money, great! If it's volunteering, even better! And if it's just making sure that you and your friends and family get out and vote Democratic on Tuesday, well that's more than enough!

No matter where you are, I'm sure you can find a Democratic cause worth your time. If you still need to find one check out: the Progressive Patriots Fund, the Democratic National Committee, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, and the Democratic Governors Association.

Let's get out there and win this thing. And let's make it a big win, so we can move this country forward...whether President Bush wants to go there or not.

My irregular and not nearly scheduled Feingold for President blogging will resume after Election Day.

Letter to Molly Ivins

2006-08-01T18:35:00.000-07:00

First off, a little bit of good news: the Progressive Patriots Fund met their fundraising goal and will be able to hire five more Patriot Corps field organizers, increasing the number of campaigns the organizers can help to 20! Thanks to everyone who donated money so this could happen!

Molly Ivins: Molly Ivins is one of the leading liberal columnists in America today, has been one of my favorite political columnists for years now. I especially enjoyed the outrage her columns would generate in the Letters to the Editor in the Chicago Tribune; when I was in Chicago it seemed like nothing upset the Trib's conservative readers more than Molly Ivins and "The Boondocks", which was just one more reason to love them.

Anyway, I was disappointed by this recent column by Ms. Ivins saying that Democrats should run Bill Moyers for president, because all the current potential candidates are centrists who lack spine. (The idea got support from another of my favorite columnists, John Nichols, whom I will always be grateful to for mentioning this blog in a column only days after I created it.)

Now, I admire Bill Moyers but it seems to me that there is already an intelligent, courageous, progressive possible candidate out there: Senator Feingold! And he's already got a growing grassroots movement behind him. So, I wrote this letter to Ms. Ivins. If you feel obliged to writing to her, too, you can do so here. I'll let you know what, if any, response I get to this.

Dear Ms. Ivins,

I’ve been a fan of yours for years, but I was rather confused by your recent column advocating a Bill Moyers for President movement. I am not confused by your admiration for Mr. Moyers, in fact, I share it. However, I question the need for progressive Democrats to toss Mr. Moyers’ hat in the ring when there is already an intelligent, honest, and progressive potential candidate with a growing grassroots movement behind him: Senator Russ Feingold of Wisconsin.

You dismiss all the possible Democratic candidates as triangulators and state that “Every single one of them needs spine, needs political courage.” Those statements are flat-out wrong with respect to Senator Feingold. Far from being Republican-lite, Senator Feingold has consistently throughout his fourteen year senate career stood up for civil liberties, universal health care, fair trade agreements, the environment, and damn near every other progressive cause out there. On the issues where he has differed from his progressive supporters (mainly confirmation votes for presidential appointees) it has never been out a need to “triangulate” or “move to the center” but rather because the votes reflected his principles.

And as for needing a spine, I’m sure I don’t need to remind you that Senator Feingold was the lone senator to oppose the USA PATRIOT Act and that he opposed the Iraq War resolution…and that after all that, he won reelection in Wisconsin in 2004 by his largest margin of victory. He was the first senator to introduce a timeline for withdrawal from Iraq and he has been the most consistent critic of the Bush Administration’s abuses of power.

While both Mr. Moyers and Senator Feingold are progressives with reputations for courage and integrity there is one thing Senator Feingold has that Mr. Moyers doesn’t: a network of energized grassroots activists ready to support him. In December 2004 I started a Russ Feingold for President blog. I expected to be alone. I’m not. There are numerous pro-Feingold websites out there, including fifteen state blogs written by Feingold supporters in states ranging from New Jersey to Texas and everywhere in between. Hundreds of people have signed up for Feingold listservs. In the fist half of 2006 Senator Feingold’s PAC raised over two million dollars…62% of that came from individuals giving less than $200 (i.e. average people). Those are just a few reflections of the growing support Senator Feingold has among grassroots Democrats.

I respect you and Bill Moyers tremendously. I agree with you when you write “I’m damned if I want to go through another presidential primary with everyone trying to figure out who has the best chance to win instead of who’s right. I want to vote for somebody who’s good and brave and who should win.” The thing is, I already believe that there is somebody out there who is good and brave and should win. And can win. And is looking at running. And has a growing grassroots movement behind him.

I hope you’ll take a look at the Feingold for President movement. Check out http://www.russforpresident.com/, the main Feingold for President site, or my own humble blog, http://russfeingold.blogspot.com/. And then I hope you’ll feel that there is a great progressive candidate out there, even without Bill Moyers running. And then I hope you’ll think about using your column to encourage others to help make Russ Feingold the next President of the United States.

Respectfully,

Daniel R. Kuehnert

Russ Roundup for July

2006-07-31T16:15:00.000-07:00

Hey folks, I didn't mean to go through the whole month without another blog entry, but that's just the way it went. It wasn't much easier to fit the blog into my life with my job then it was to fit it in with school. Guess I'll just have to make the time by eliminating something else...eating and sleeping have always struck me as rather pointless...

Anyhow, here's some of the big events from the Month in Russ:

Patriot Corps: Earlier this month Senator Feingold and his Progressive Patriots Fund announced the creation of the Patriot Corps: a group of fifteen field organizers who the Fund will hire, train and send to key races in Wisconsin and throughout the country. Sound like something you'd be interested in doing? If so, the application is here, and they are accepting applications until August 11.

Of course while hiring fifteen field organizers is great, twenty would be even better and the Progressive Patriot Fund has been trying to raise $25,000 by midnight tonight in order to be able to help five more campaigns. While I don't know how many people will read this before midnight, the Fund was within $4,000 of the goal this morning, so if you can, please donate here.

And Speaking of Donations...: The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel ran an interesting article today looking at where the approximately $2 million Senator Feingold has raised this year has come from, and how that differs from other possible Democratic presidential candidates. From the article:

In the first half of 2006, the Wisconsin senator raised 62% of his funds from people giving $200 or less, a much higher share than any other potential candidate.

If you want to see the exact numbers, check out this post by Chris Bowers at MyDD. Here's a summary: the possible candidate with the next highest percentage of small donors? John Kerry with 32%, followed by Wes Clark with 28% and Hillary Clinton with 18%. No one else was in double digits and for several candidates, small donors made up 1% or less of their donors.

So why does this matter? For one thing, it shows who Senator Feingold represents and who wants him to run: he is the candidate of average people who care about the future of the Democratic Party and the country. And it shows that people are willing to invest in Senator Feingold's campaign. As ilya S. at Russforpresident.com wrote:

What Senator Feingold is doing is just great campaign building. People will do things for your campaign if they are invested. They will go out and knock on doors in the freezing cold of Iowa and New Hampshire, they will do mailings at 5 am and Meet Ups at 9 pm. They will do what they can to get you elected because it's not just about the candidate but about the campaign. Great things are on the horizon. The evidence is slowly appearing, but Senator Feingold is exactly right in his word choice. Should Russ decide to run, contributions of time and money will explode. And then we'll have a genuine people powered candidate for 2008.

Health Care: Of course, the reason Senator Feingold is able to attract the small donors is that they know that he is willing to stand up for them on the issues that matter, like health care (which Senator Feingold has described as the number one issue he hears concerns about at his listening sessions in each of Wisconsin's 72 counties).

Last week, Senator Feingold announced a proposal for a federal program that would help state governments deliver universal health care to their citizens. A fact sheet on the program is here and an article on it is here. From the article:

"The time has come to see if we can get across our ideological differences--which are serious -- and to see if we can at least get off the dime with the idea of pilot projects," Feingold, D-Wis., told The Associated Press in a telephone interview. "I thought it was time basically to break a logjam."

Feingold plans to unveil the legislation at a news conference in Milwaukee today, and introduce it in Congress later this week or early next week. He acknowledged it has little chance of passing this year, but said he wants to have something ready to go when a new Congress takes over next year.

I hope this program passes next year. Of course, that all depends on what kind of Congress we get, but I think Senator Feingold's proposal has a number of attractive features: it takes a first step towards the much needed goal of universal health care, it allows states the opportunity to be creative and try different types of programs while still giving them federal financial support (and as Tennesseans for Feingold noted on July 25: Senator Feingold spelled out the specifics of how to pay for it) . It's practical and creative, and it should pass...and then in the Feingold administration we could final achieve the dream ouniversalal healthcare for all Americans.

The health care proposal is one of a series of domestic policy proposals Senator Feingold will be announcing over the next six months, and I look forward to seeing the rest.

One issue? Hardly: Senator Feingold's health care proposal just makes me more amused by a recent criticism of Senator Feingold that I've seen popping up both in the mainstream media and by bloggers supporting other candidates: that Senator Feingold is a "one issue" candidate. An example can be found on this Hotline blog piece from the end of June.

This criticism is confusing because the people who use it never say what "one issue" they are talking about, and Senator Feingold has been a recognized leader on a number of major issues. And I don't just say this as one of his supporters.

People who aren't obsessed political junkies but follow the news might recognize Feingold as one of the two sponsors of that campaign finance law (what other bill in recently history is as well known by the name of its sponsors?) Or they might recognize Feingold as the one senator who voted against the USA PATRIOT Act in 2001. Or they might recognize him as the first senator to propose a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq. Or they might recognize him as the senator who proposed censuring President Bush for his illegasurveillancece of American citizens.

So please, people who say Senator Feingold is a one issue candidate can you tell me which one issue that is? Is it campaign finance reform? Civil liberties? The war in Iraq? Overreaching by the executive? Or perhaps it's his constant support for fair trade? Or his proposal for universal health care? Since I'm the one blogging in support of Senator Feingold please let me know what the only one issue I care about is; that would really free up a lot of my time.

And one final thought: how many of the possible Democratic candidates besides Senator Feingold are associated in the mind of a generally informed citizen (but not a political junkie) with EVEN one issue?

There's Gore and the environment (he's also been outspoken against the war and the domestisurveillancece programs). John Edwards is making a name for himself by focusing on poverty. Hillary may be remembered for the Clinton Health Care plan, or for her attack on Grand Theft Auto.

I know the other possible candidates care about the issues and have ideas, but right now I can't say there is anyone who people would remember as "The guy who...[whatever]" while there are at least four different issues Senator Feingold might be remembered for.

Iowa: Senator Feingold headed back to the Hawkeye (and First Caucus) State two weeks ago. To read more about it check out the great coverage over at Iowa for Feingold (scroll down to July 16) and Russforpresident.com .

And a poll to vote in: The Racine Journal Times has a poll asking "Should Russ Feingold run for President?" Cast your vote in favor of Russ!

So that's all for this time...hopefully I'll have more later this week.

Until next time, keep going Forward!

Look! My Name's in the Paper!

2006-07-02T16:35:00.000-07:00

Yesterday, the Valley Scene, an alternative newspaper covering the Fox Valley in Wisconsin, hit the stands with a cover story titled "Russ Feingold: the Next President of the United States?" What makes this article different from previous stories about a possible Feingold presidential run? Why, it's the first article to quote me!

Okay, my ego-boost from being interviewed for a newspaper story aside, the article is really good, quoting Feingold netroots activists (myself and ilya from RussforPresident), Wisconsin supporters of Russ, and Wisconsinites who oppose Russ (but admire him for standing by his principles). While I'm a definitely biased here, I think it's one of the best articles about a possible Feingold for President run since the author (Tony Palmeri) interviewed actual Feingold supporters, instead of just quoting political science professors or Democratic strategists and dismissing the grassroots and netroots activists.

Anyhow, the Valley Scene's online edition isn't updated yet, but you can read the article on Tony Palmeri's website and post comments on his blog.

Here is the most interesting part (totally biased opinion):

Ilya’s enthusiasm is shared by Dan Kuehnert, a student at Washington University law school in St. Louis, self described “liberal nerd,” and creator of two pro-Feingold blogs: Russ Feingold For President and Missouri For Feingold. Dan’s been a Feingold fan since following the McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform bill at age 18 in 1999. He says that even when he’s disagreed with Feingold (such as his vote to confirm John Ashcroft as Attorney General) he “always thought he acted really thoughtfully and followed his own principles.” Like Ed, Dan thinks that Senator Feingold's integrity and intelligence are characteristics we need in a president, and that “he has positions on the issues that are also what America needs: a president who will fight terrorism while protecting civil liberties, a president who will make government cleaner and more accountable, and a president who will make the global economy work for everyone, here and abroad, rather than just the big corporate CEOs.” If Feingold announced a candidacy, Dan would stand out in the freezing weather handing out flyers or knocking on doors, “and Senator Feingold's the only possible candidate I'd do that for.”

So, there ya go. Sometimes I wonder if I should change that "liberal nerd" quote. When I wrote it, I didn't figure anyone would read it. I don't know if my self-deprecating humor translates that well in print. Neither does sarcasm. Which pretty much leaves me with straightforward jokes about guys walking into bars with pigs under their arms...and I'm no good at those.

On the other hand, I have statrted two Feingold for President blogs, so maybe that line is just plain accurate rather than self-deprecating...

And if that paragraph isn't enough for you, you are in luck! Tony gave me premission to post our entire email interview on the blog. So here it goes...

Dan K.: The Tony Palmeri interview (Questions in bold)

*Why did you start a Russ Feingold for President blog?

I started my blog back in December of 2004. I was one of those Democrats who, immediately after Kerry lost, thought "okay, what do we do four years from now?" I read every column and blog I could find about possible Democratic candidates for 2008 and I found them all disappointing: they were either focused on Hillary Clinton and how her nomination is "inevitable" or they promoted possible candidates like Evan Bayh, Mark Warner, or Bill Richardson arguing about their electability: arguing that they can win one or two key states and therefore the election and that is all that matters. And I found it discouraging that none of this dialogue asked what I think is the most important question: Who would make the best president?

I asked myself that question and my answer was Senator Russ Feingold. I got interested in politics again when I was 18, in 1999, and I read about Senator Feingold and Senator McCain and their fight for campaign finance reform; I just found it disgusting how much money went into politics and how hard it was to make even modest change to that. I followed Senator Feingold since then and even when I disagreed with him (such as his vote to confirm Ashcroft) I always thought he acted really thoughtfully and followed his own principles. I think that Senator Feingold's integrity and intelligence are characteristics we need in a president, and I think that he has positions on the issues that are also what America needs: a president who will fight terrorism while protecting civil liberties, a president who will make government cleaner and more accountable, and a president who will make the global economy work for everyone, here and abroad, rather than just the big corporate CEOs.

Anyhow, I knew Senator Feingold was the candidate I wanted to see the Democrats nominate in 2008 and I couldn't find any blogs or websites supporting him, so I decided to start one myself.

*What kind of response have you received?

It's been really amazing. In terms of emails and comments, the positive far out number the negative. But even more exciting are all the other Feingold for President sites that have sprung up: russforpresident.com is a great national site for Feingold supporters to exchange ideas, and there is a project to start blogs for state Feingold supporters in each of the fifty states. So far there are around fifteen, and not just in "blue" states but also in places like South Carolina, Texas, and my state of Missouri.

And it's really surprised me. I thought I'd start a blog about Feingold, no one would read it, I'd forget about it and that's the end of the story. Instead I discovered that there are a LOT of people out there who think Senator Feingold's kind of leadership is what the party and the country need and are willing to work really hard for it, and I love that! It's why I keep going back to my blog, even when it's been hard to because of my job or law school.

*Do you think Feingold can get the Democratic Party nomination?

Yes, but I think he and his supporters will have to work hard for it. We'd be the underdogs going in but I think we could pull it off.

First why I think Senator Feingold can get the nomination: I think his courage and integrity get a lot of respect even from those who disagree with him, and I think everyone wants a president with those attributes. And then there are the issues I mentioned before: fighting terrorism while protecting civil liberties, make government cleaner and more accountable, and making the global economy work for everyone; I think those are issue that the vast majority of Americans, and especially the vast majority of Democrats believe in.

So why would we be underdogs: mainly because the conventional wisdom about Feingold already seems to be forming among the media and Democratic activists: he's not electable. And why is he supposedly unelectable: because he's twice divorced, Jewish, and, worst of all, he's liberal. And I find that really disappointing and kind of insulting to the whole idea of democracy: here's this great guy but we won't support him because we don't think other people will support him. And I think that's the wrong way to look at it, instead I hope that if people think Feingold would make the best president they'll be willing to work to convince others of that. And if people are willing to believe and willing to work, we can get Senator Feingold the nomination and the Presidency.

*If Feingold were to declare his candidacy, what kinds of things might you do for his campaign in addition to running the blog?

Simply put: I'd be willing to do anything his campaign would want me to do. If he runs, I'd take time off law school and go to Iowa or New Hampshire or Wisconsin or wherever the campaign is do whatever kind of work is needed. I'd love to do official blogging for the campaign, or any kind of writing or researching they'd need. But if they just need me to stand out in the freezing weather handing out flyers or knocking on doors, I'd do that. And Senator Feingold's the only possible candidate I'd do that for. If he doesn't run, I might give money to a candidate or do some work in Missouri, but I can't see myself blogging or giving up any significant amount of time for anyone but Feingold in 2008

*Is there anything else you would like to say?

Just to repeat what I wrote earlier in the question if Feingold could get the nomination: to anybody who is reading this and likes Feingold but thinks he might not win, just be willing to believe and willing to work and we can make it happen. The only way we will be able to bring this country forward is if we are willing to work for it.

End of Interview

So, what do you think? Do I have a future as a professional email interview answerer? Is that a profession?

Anyway, thank you to Tony Palmeri for the article, the interview, and allowing me to post it on my site!

Until next time...keep going Forward!

"Meet the Press" Roundup

2006-06-27T21:03:00.000-07:00

Usually, I don't like to just provide a bunch of links, I like to provide some of my own commentary, but today I don't have a lot of time, and I do have a couple of read-worthy items related to Senator Feingold's "Meet the Press" appearance:

ilya s at RussforPresident.com has a nice post about how new polls indicate that, as hard as it is for the media to accept, Senator Feingold's views on Iraq are quite in line with those of ordinary Americans;

Warren at Iowa for Feingold demolishes the RNC's press release about Senator Feingold's "MTP" interview;

and, finally, at The Huffington Post, the title of Bob Cesca's "Russert Watch" piece for the week? "Come On, People. Admit It. Senator Feingold is the Real Deal for '08". Admit it? Bob, I've been preaching it to anyone who would listen since December of 2004!

But it's a great piece; not only positive on Feingold, it always has the quote: "I also enjoy watching David Broder. He's clearly a smart guy, but whenever he's on -- and feel free to rip me for saying this -- I can't help but to repeat, "Am I not turtley enough for the Turtle Club?" "
I find that very amusing. Sorry.

That's all for this time, until next time...Keep going Forward!

Meet the Press

2006-06-25T21:27:00.000-07:00

I think Senator Feingold did a great job on "Meet the Press" this morning...but, don't take my word for it check out the video or the transcript.

Tim Russert asked Senator Feingold about all the usual topics: Iraq, the censure of the president, Hillary, the 2008 presidential race, and I think Senator Feingold did a great job getting his message across despite Russert's best attempts to trip him up (which is Russert's job, I guess).

Senator Feingold appearance on "Meet the Press" has won a lot of his praise among bloggers for his saying that he will support whoever wins the Democratic Senate primary in Connecticut, whether it is Joe Lieberman or Ned Lamont...thus saying he will NOT support Lieberman if he loses the primary and runs for election as an Independent. You wouldn't think a Democratic Senator saying he'll support the Democratic nominee for Senate would be newsworthy, but, unfortunately, in this case it is. You can read more about this in Jonathan Singer's post on MyDD.

Obviously the Republican National Committee also thinks that Senator Feingold did a good job, otherwise they wouldn't have felt the need to issue this press release.

Just to point out one, of probably many mistakes in the RNC press release, it claims that: " Sens. Kerry And Feingold Even Asked For Donations To Fund Their "Cut And Run" Campaign...(Sens. Kerry and Feingold, "No Time To Play It Safe," Email, 6/20/06)" Okay, I actually received that email and it focused entirely on getting on getting us to contact our senators to support the Kerry-Feingold Amendment, it never asked for donations. But hey, never let the truth get in the way of a third-rate press release.

That's it for this time...Until next time, keep going Forward!

A Depressing Vote and an Entertaining Interview

2006-06-24T21:36:00.000-07:00

First off: Senator Feingold will be on "Meet the Press" tomorrow morning, so, if anyone reads this between now and the time "Meet the Press" airs in your local area, make sure to check it out! And, in the more likely event that "Meet the Press" has already aired, apparently you can view it on your computer here through the miracle of technology! Neato!

Now, onto the real subjects of the post (as referenced in the title)...

The Kerry-Feingold Amendment: Earlier this week the Senate voted on two amendments to the Defense Appropriations bill related to the Iraq War. One of them, a binding resolution co-sponsored by Senator Feingold and Senator Kerry would have set a timetable for redeployment of US forces from Iraq by July 2007. It was defeated by an 83-16 vote: my thanks to the other eleven senators who voted for it: Senators Akaka, Boxer, Durbin, Harkin, Inouye, Jeffords, Kennedy, Lautenberg, Leahy, Menendez and Wyden.

Perhaps more depressing was the result of the vote on the Levin-Reed Amendment, a non-binding resolution that would have expressed the Senate's desire to see troops redeployed from Iraq but wouldn't have set a timetable...it failed 60-39...not even all the Democrats would support that. Now, I didn't really expect Democrats to unify behind the Kerry-Feingold Amendment, but the fact that they couldn't unite behind a non-binding measure that didn't even include a timetable...it makes me worried about the party's chances in the fall; I fear the party leaders are determined not to have a party position on Iraq, and hope that somehow we can win a majority while ignoring an issue on everybody's mind. And Senator Feingold has said, you'd think that we would have learned from 2002 and 2004 that this strategy won't work.

An interesting story on Iraq from the Times of London describes a peace proposal that the Iraqi government is going to announce:

The Government will promise a finite, UN-approved timeline for the withdrawal of all foreign troops from Iraq; a halt to US operations against insurgent strongholds; an end to human rights violations, including those by coalition troops; and compensation for victims of attacks by terrorists or Iraqi and coalition forces.

So, will the Bush Administration denounce the Iraqi plan as "cut and run"? Probably not, considering the U.S. Ambassador helped craft this proposal.

And now for something completely different...

Best Feingold Interview Ever...well, recently: Senator Feingold was interviewed for GQ by Lisa DePaulo. Titled "The Real Maverick" it is definitely worth reading.

Sure, we get the usual questions and answers regarding censuring the president for his illegal wiretapping, but we also learn about the Senator's golf game, his packing habits, and who some of his best friends in the Senate are. Still not interested? Well, here are some of my favorite parts. First, on an issue that will come up more often than it really should:

Let's talk about this twice-divorced thing.

Sure.

How much of a political liability do you think it will be?

I have no idea. If it is, so be it. That's up to the people to
decide.

What's it like to be a single senator?

It's new to me. You sort of end up working a whole lot. Theres a tendency
to let the time get ﬁlled up. So Ive been very careful-

So you've become less social?

No, probably more social, in the sense that because you don't have a spouse-see, when you're married, you really feel an obligation to spend all that available time with your spouse if you can. I'm able to spend more time with more people now. I'm reconnecting with a lot of people and old friends.

Dating?

Um, that's, uh, classiﬁed?

Are there women throwing themselves at you?

I certainly wouldn't say that. [smiles] I'm not gonna say that.

You know, there've been some legendary single senators.

Yeah, I know. I'm not aspiring to be in that hall of fame.

Even if I wasn't someone who'd been running a Feingold for President blog since December 2004, I'd have to admire the Senator for answering these questions about a very personal subject with honesty, class, and humor. Unfortunately, that won't stop reporters from continuing to ask questions about his divorces, and it won't stop people from saying it's a reason Senator Feingold couldn't get elected President...but I'm glad to know that Senator Feingold isn't letting that stop him.

And now, for two parts I just found fun:

Have you ever met [Tiger Woods]?

No. I'd love to. He and Bob Dylan. Those are the two I'd love to meet.

I like that because it reminds me of one of my favorite Russ Feingold stories. During his 2004 reelection campaign CSPAN broadcast some of Senator Feingold's debates with Tim Michels. Late one night, I was watching one and, to know more about the candidates as people, they were asked what two CDs they'd take with them if they were driving cross country by themselves. Right away, the first CD Senator Feingold named was Time Out of Mind by Dylan. As a huge Dylan fan and a huge Feingold fan, I really loved this. To make sure I'd remember it, I actually wrote "Russ Feingold chose Time Out of Mind" on the back of an envelope. (This is one of only two times I found something on late night TV important enough to write down...the other was the first time I saw the infomercial for Ron Popeil's Showtime Rotisserie Grill. I thought it was the greatest invention ever and wrote down all the information so my mom could order it. She didn't. I've spent the rest of my life trying to get various relatives to buy one for me.)

I also liked the "Time Out of Mind" choice because it's nice when politicians use questions like that to just let you know a little bit more about them, rather then to pander to some group. The question I most remember from the 2004 Demcocratic Presidential Primary debates is when the candidates were asked to name their favorite song and Joe Lieberman named Bill Clinton's old campaign theme song "Don't Stop Thinking About Tomorrow" and Dick Gephardt named "Born in the U.S.A." which he was using as a campaign theme song, proving that you don't have to be a Republican to fail to realize that, lyrically, "Born in the U.S.A." is NOT a happy song. Then Howard Dean surprised everyone by naming some Wyclef Jean song his son had played for him recently.

As you can tell, it's a good thing GQ didn't have me interview Senator Feingold, or I would've asked such follow up questions as "What's your favorite song on Time Out of Mind?", "What are your 125 favorite Dylan songs, and why?" and, of course, "Knocked Out Loaded or Down in the Groove?"

So, Senator Feingold's favorite golfer is Tiger Woods, one of his favorite albums is Time Out of Mind and he has said his favorite novel is The Stranger by Albert Camus. I wonder what his favorite TV show is? Based on this amusing exchange from the GQ interview, I'm guessing it's probably not "Friends"...

Okay. Real quick: Jennifer or Angelina?

Jennifer? Jennifer who?

Oh, come on, Senator! Jennifer or Angelina?

Jennifer who?

Aniston. [silence] Oh, God. You don't read the tabloids, do
you?

Can I have a third choice? Can I pick Sharon Stone?

The really sad thing is, if this interview had occurred closer to the 2008 elections, the media would use it as evidence that Senator Feingold is too out of touch with what real people are interested in to be president...After all, Trent Lott has said that it is the duty of all senators to not only watch American Idol, but to vote for it! Senator Feingold really oughta start reading the tabloids if he wants to be president, or at least start watching "Access Hollywood"...

But enough with my digressions and attempts at jokes...read that interview! Then get your friends to read it! Then ask them the Jennifer or Angelina question! Then ask them if they'd vote for Senator Feingold for President! (Or maybe switch the order on the last two...)

New Feingold Blog: There's a nice new Feingold blog out there Central Pennsylvania for Feingold, started by Kris in Centre County, PA! Kris had the wonderful opportunity of seeing Senator Feingold at the Take Back America convention, and was inspired enough to join us in the Feingold blogosphere...so stop on by and say hello!

So, that's all for this time...Until next time, keep going Forward!

Taking Back America with Russ Feingold

2006-06-15T18:49:00.000-07:00

Just a minor update...Yesterday, Senator Feingold spoke at the Campaign for America's Future "Take Back America" Conference in Washington, D.C.

Video of the speech is available here and you can read it here. The speech is about twenty minutes long (well, the video is, you can probably read it quicker...) and Senator Feingold emphasizes the importance of Democrats standing on principle and standing up to the Republicans, especially on the war in Iraq and the war on terror.

Here's one of my favorite parts, which comes towards the end of the speech (as you might guess for the "And so to conclude..."):

And so to conclude, I would urge you, as you go out this year and do all the wonderful things you're going to do in the various venues that you work in, to make the point to people that you care as passionately as anyone about the tragedy of 9/11, you care as passionately as anyone about protecting our kids, that you have your memories of what happened on 9/11 and how it made you feel about your future and your kids' future and your grandchildren's' future.

But as you say that and as you share your own memories with people, make it clear that there is no greater victory for these terrorists than if they can get us out of fear to alter our great system of government. They would have no greater victory than to be able to do that to us. (Applause.) Make the argument -- make the argument based on the fact that the American people want to be focused on making sure that we're not attacked again. They do not want to fear that their own government is doing something inappropriate to them. That's a distraction that makes it harder for us to do this.

I hope that Democrats far and wide will start picking up on that message, and I'm certainly glad Senator Feingold is putting it out there.

At least it got a good reaction at the "Take Back America" Conference. According to the AP:

Some at the audience chanted Run-Russ-Run, and others wore buttons with the same sentiment. The Wisconsin senator is considering a presidential run in 2008.
Many people at the event, put together by the Campaign for America's Future, gave Feingold standing ovations when he said Democrats needed to stand up to the Bush administration on Iraq and on civil liberties issues.

Until next time, keep going Forward!

An Interview and a Straw Poll

2006-06-12T18:18:00.000-07:00

Just a little update about, yeah, an interview and a straw poll (sorry I couldn't come up with a more clever title...)

First, the interview. Washington Post reporters Chris Cillizza and Dan Balz are having an "ongoing series of conversations" with potential 2008 presidential candidates, and our man Russ had his turn last week. It's a fairly in depth interview, and below are three of my favorite parts. First, Senator Feingold talks about what he is hearing from Demcocrats around the nation as he travels:

Let's start with a broad question about the Democratic Party. There's all this talk about what ails the Democratic Party. What do you think the party's situation is these days and what needs to be done about it.

SEN. FEINGOLD: Well, people are not just thirsty to win. They are tired of losing. It goes beyond that. And I have checked this everywhere a person can check it. I go to every one of Wisconsin's 72 counties every year and hold a town meeting. And pretty soon, it will be my 1,000th listening session.

I've been to about 14 different states across the country, including the deep southern states like Alabama and Florida ... . There is one central theme. People said the same thing. They said when are you guys going to start standing up?

There is this deep sense, especially in the base of the party, that we don't have firm principles or that if we have firm principles, we're not stating them firmly. And it is amazing to hear people, almost as if they've had the same script, saying we are tired of Democrats looking weak.

So that appears to be the conviction. I don't think people are as concerned about what the exact issues are as this feeling that we don't act like we are ready to govern this country both domestically and also especially ... standing up to the White House with regard to the mistakes and abuses of the post-9/11 era.

So that's what I hear. I'm convinced it is accurate.

I definitely agree with the Senator hear. If the Democrats can't be depended upon to challenege the president when in the opposition, why should people believe that they'd be capable of leading the country if they had a majority in Congress or won control of the White House?

On a similar note, Senator Feingold calls for the Democrats to take a clear stand on the war in Iraq in the midterm elections.

Do you think it will hurt the Democrats in the midterm elections not to have a kind of clear consensus position on Iraq?
SEN. FEINGOLD: Definitely. I think people ... thought we were going to win in 2000. People thought we were going to win in 2002. People thought we were going to win in 2004. I think in each case, it was either the inertia that people didn't want to change the president in the middle of a war or concerns that Democrats weren't ready to handle these difficult antiterrorism issues.
If we don't show that we have a strong vision of how to complete that mission, bring the troops home, and refocus in a positive way in the fight against terrorism, I'm afraid people will once again by default, you know, hedge it and maybe allow Republicans to stay in power.
Maybe we would win one House back, ... but then I worry what the impact would be in the 2008 election when it is desperately important that we elect a Democratic president. So I am concerned about it. I think we are drifting completely on the Iraq issue right now. We should be endorsing a reasonable approach for a timetable to bring the troops home or at least redeploy them by the end of 2006. I think it would find great favor with the American people.

A lot of Democrats disagree with Senator Feingold, thinking that becasue of the President's low approval ratings and the general perception of incompetence in the administration and corruption in Congress, the Democrats should be able to win by default, out of disgust with the people in office now. But I think it will be impossible for the party to win without taking a clear stand on the issue that's on everyone's mind. We have to show we have a way to get out of Iraq and focus on fighting terrorism more intelligently and effectively.

And, finally, I like this part:

I've heard a lot of people say -- privately and publicly -- that "Sen. Feingold makes a great candidate ... says what a lot of people are thinking. But governing is about compromise, and we're not sure that he has a compromising bone in his body." How do you answer that?
SEN. FEINGOLD: You know, I don't like blowing my horn. But I think it is fair to say that I'm one of the most experienced legislators in the United States right now. I have been a legislator for almost 25 years, [since] I was 29 years old. I know exactly when to hold them and when to fold them. I've done it hundreds of times, one of the most famous legislation probably of the last 20 years in America, the name that is most associated with major legislation.
... If you think McCain-Feingold is what I wanted it to be in the beginning, that was an excruciating eight-year process of compromise. On occasion, I said to John McCain, "I feel like my arm has been chopped off." It was a very tough process.
We started out with a bill that had to do with public finance -- or free television time and all these other limitations. We ended up with something very important, a bill on soft money. So I would argue I might have more experience with political compromise than just about any other member of the Senate.

I like that part becasue it shows something very important about Senator Feingold that unfortunately gets ignored too often: he's an experienced legislator who is experienced in crafting bipartisan compromises. Sometimes it seems like people think that only moderates know about compromise, that if you are a proud progressive like Senator Feingold, then all you do is standing around, talking about your principles and getting nothing done. The truth is, proud progressives know how to forge the kinds of compromises that bring our country forward.

The Straw Poll: Well, Senator Feingold certainly has the support of the people who've known him the longest and worked with him the closest: the Wisconsin Democrats.

At this past weekend's Wisconsin Democratic Party convention, Senator Feingold was the clear winner in a straw poll conducted by WisPolitics.com:

Russ Feingold 295
Al Gore 55
Hillary Clinton 48
John Edwards 41

Those numbers are out of 548 votes cast, and no other candidate recieved more than 40 votes...and no candidate came within 239 votes of Senator Feingold!

Obviously his fellow Badger State Dems are taking the Senator seriously as a presidential candidate! As ilya at RussforPresident.com says, "Now on to Iowa, New Hampshire and the rest of the country."

Thanks to Mike Schramm, Managing Editor of WisPolitics.com for bringing this to my attention!

That's all...until next time, keep going Forward!

Finally Feingold

2006-06-09T16:26:00.000-07:00

Okay, so, first things fist: Why has it been so damned long since I've blogged?

Well it's a funny story. First, I had a major paper due in one of my classes, then I had to study for final exams, then I actually had to take final exams, then I engaged in this insane thing called the law review write-on competition, then I was out of town and without internet access, and then I was starting a new job.

Okay, so that story wasn't funny at all. But it was true, and I hope that's good enough. I consider this blog and working to make Russ Feingold the next president of the United States one of the most important things I do...however, at this point, it isn't always the most urgent thing I have to do. I'd like to promise that I'll never go this long without updating the blog again...but I think a better (and easier to keep) promise would be to stop making promises about how often I can get around to updating this thing.

I'll update it when I can, and when I do, I'll always do my best to make it is informative, intelligent, and entertaining as possible. Rest assured that I continue to believe that Russ Feingold is the best choice for the Democratic Party in 2008. In fact, every time I watch the news I wish I had the time and energy to blog here, because every time I watch the news I am reminded that this party and the nation need a man with the vision, courage, and integrity of Senator Russ Feingold.

Okay, the apology out of the way, let's talk about some of what was going on in the world of Russ since I've been gone...(Warning, this post is long...after all, I'm trying to make up for almost three months of not posting...)

Gay Marriage: On Wednesday the Senate rejected the Republicans latest attempt to write discrimination into the Constitution, once again rejecting the proposed amendment banning gay marriage by a vote of 49-48. While I am grateful to all the senators, Democratic and Republican (yes, seven of them actually voted against it) who helped defeat this amendment, this is a Feingold for President blog so, naturally I have to call attention to the fact that not only did Senator Feingold oppose the amendment, he has taken an even stronger stand for civil rights than the vast majority of his fellow senators, declaring his support for full marriage equality. As this (month old...yeah sorry about the delay, again) article notes:

In a speech here Saturday night to the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, Senate Democrat Russ Feingold vowed to help defeat the Wisconsin referendum, declaring that marriage "is not always and should not always be between a man and a woman."
Along with his state, Feingold may provide his own case study in the politics of gay marriage. Like most Democrats, he opposes a constitutional amendment defining marriage, an amendment that is expected to fail in the Senate next month. But he has gone a significant step further and declared his personal belief that gays and lesbians should be able to marry. He is one of only four U.S. senators - and the only potential 2008 presidential candidate - to do so.
Feingold has surprised even some gay rights advocates by stating his endorsement in such plain and unequivocal language, in contrast to the personal qualms about gay marriage typically voiced by political figures who support civil unions. Along with being honored at Saturday's dinner, the senator drew several standing ovations.
...
"It goes against a lot of what people were brought up to believe, let's face it," Feingold said in an interview last week. He said he declared his views because he was going to have to vote on the Wisconsin referendum.

"I thought it was best just to say what I really have concluded, that this is really the ultimate civil rights issue, not just a state's rights issue, and that I support gay marriage. If two people care enough about each other that they want to get married, they ought to be able to," he said.

I applaud Senator Feingold for once again ignoring the fear-mongering tactics of the Republicans and taking a bold stance in defense of civil rights. I hope that the people of Wisconsin will follow Senator Feingold's lead, and the state's Progressive heritage, and reject the referendum.

Of related interest: please check out Equality for Feingold, a blog for GLBT supporters of Senator Feingold; Senator Feingold's press release (from April...) announcing his support for marriage equality;, and Senator Feingold's Diary at DailyKos calling the gay marriage ban "A Shameful Political Ploy."

National Intelligence: Unfortunately, unlike on the gay marriage amendment, the majority of the Senate did not follow Senator Feingold's lead when it came to opposing the confirmation of General Michael Hayden as CIA director, which passed by a vote of 78-15.

Senator Feingold's confirmation votes are always fascinating to observe as he tends to give great deference to the president to choose his own people, much to the chagrin of some of his supporters. Senator Feingold voted for the confirmations of John Ashcroft as Attorney General, Condi Rice as Secretary of State, and John Roberts as Chief Justice. He's certainly no partisan hack when it comes to these votes (or any votes really) and when he opposes a nominee (such as with Attorney General Gonzales and now General Hayden) there's probably a pretty damn good reason for it.

From Senator Feingold's statement in opposition to the Hayden confirmation:

"I voted against the nomination of General Michael Hayden to be Director of the CIA because I am not convinced that the nominee respects the rule of law and Congress's oversight responsibilities. General Hayden is highly experienced and talented. But, as Director of the NSA, General Hayden directed an illegal program that put Americans on American soil under surveillance without the legally required approval of a judge. Having finally been briefed about this program last week, I am more convinced than ever that it is illegal. Our country needs a CIA Director who is committed to fighting terrorism aggressively without breaking the law or infringing on the rights of Americans. General Hayden's role in implementing and publicly defending the warrantless surveillance program does not give me confidence that he is capable of fulfilling this important responsibility.
...
The stakes are high. Al Qaeda and its affiliates seek to destroy us. We must fight back and we must join this fight together, as a nation. But when Administration officials ignore the law and ignore the other branches of government, it distracts us from fighting our enemies. I am disappointed that the President decided to make such a controversial nomination at this time. While I defer to Presidents in considering nominations to positions in the executive branch, I cannot vote for a nominee whose conduct raises such troubling questions about his adherence to the rule of law."

During the Senate confirmation hearings Intelligence Committee chairman Senator Pat Roberts used his old catchphrase: "I am a strong supporter of the First Amendment, the Fourth Amendment and civil liberties. But you have no civil liberties if you are dead."

Now that quote makes me feel like my head is going to explode; and it likely has the same effect on the rest of you. I thought for days about what would be the best thing to say to criticize such a ridiculous quote and the even more ridiculous ideas it stands for. Then I realized Senator Feingold had come up with the perfect response...over four years ago, in the debate on the PATRIOT Act in October of 2001:

"Of course, there is no doubt that if we lived in a police state, it would be easier to catch terrorists. If we lived in a country that allowed the police to search your home at any time for any reason; if we lived in a country that allowed the government to open your mail, eavesdrop on your phone conversations, or intercept your email communications; if we lived in a country that allowed the government to hold people in jail indefinitely based on what they write or think, or based on mere suspicion that they are up to no good, then the government would no doubt discover and arrest more terrorists.

But that probably would not be a country in which we would want to live. And that would not be a country for which we could, in good conscience, ask our young people to fight and die. In short, that would not be America."

Of related interest: The transcript of a great Feingold speech on National Security from the National Press Club ; a good commentary from TomPaine.com on that speech ; and Senator Feingold's statement about the death of al-Zarqawi.

Censure: Yes, it's been a while since Senator Feingold first introduced the idea of censuring President Bush for the domestic wiretapping program. Yes, it's no longer the talk of the town. But that doesn't mean the idea has disappeared and that doesn't mean it is not worth talking about.

The time that passed has proven that at least one of the arguments against the censure resolution was bunk: it did not galvanize support around President Bush...at least it didn't galvanize the support of the between 60 and 70 percent of Americans who continue to disapprove of the way President Bush is doing his job.

When asked by Jonathan Singer at myDD about another of the criticisms of the resolution, that it was all a political ploy by Senator Feingold, the answer reveals yet another reason why Senator Feingold would be a great president:

Feingold: Well, obviously it wasn't a political ploy, and I think most of the people asked in a poll like that don't know who I am. Anybody who knows who I am knows that this is the kind of thing I have been doing throughout my career when I think something's wrong, especially with lawbreaking or possible lawbreaking.

I was the only Democrat to vote to hear the evidence in the Clinton impeachment trial. I was one of the first two Democrats to call for an independent counsel when there were concerns about Democrat President Clinton's campaign finance practices. So I think anybody who really knows me knows that not only was this not political but I would have done this if a Democrat President was making such outrageous assertions about executive power as George Bush is doing.

After the Bush Administration I don't know if there is anything America needs more than a president who understands and respects the limits of executive power.

Of course, the fact that the criticisms of the censure proposal are wrong isn't actually a reason to support it. So, here is the reason I support it, stated as simply as possible: I don't want to have to explain to future generations why, when the president decided he could stop following the law merely because he didn't it like it any more, nobody stood up to tell him he couldn't do that.

So please, if you haven't already, head on over to Senator Feingold's Progressive Patriots Fund website you can sign up in support of the censure resolution as a citizen co-sponsor; and then to MoveOn.org you can sign a petition in support of censure that will also be sent to your senators and representatives.

While I wish that Congress would have chosen of it's own accord to stand up and hold the President accountable, at the end of the day the responsibility lies with us, the American people, to demand that Congress take action and tell the President that we will not stand idly by while he breaks the law. I hope that we don't fail in that task. As the distinguished jurist Learned Hand once said, "Liberty lies in the hearts of men and women; when it dies there, no constitution, no law, no court can save it."

(And obviously I've been in law school too long if I think quoting Learned Hand somehow magically makes my argument more compelling.)

New websites: Several new Feingold state websites are out there: Wisconsin, South Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Texas! Also of note, is RussForge a website for creating and sharing Internet resources for the Feingold movement.

And thus ends the update. See you in another two and a half months! (Kidding, kidding...)

Seriously, my thanks to everybody who read through this post and continues to read this blog. If you made a comment or sent an email in the past couple of months and didn't get a response, I apologize and please send or post it again and I'll get back to you. I really appreciate all the feedback I get.

Until next time, keep going Forward!

Russ on "The Daily Show" TONIGHT!

2006-03-22T17:01:00.000-08:00

Hey everyone, just in case you haven't heard Senator Feingold will be on the Daily Show tonight at 10 pm (Central Time). If you can't catch it then it will be rerun at midnight and a number of times tomorrow. Also, clips from the interview will be available at the show's website, I'll post a link as soon as they're up.

And in case you were wondering why I hadn't posted on the censure resolution yet it's because I was out of town (and without internet access) for all of last week, and I have been ridiculously busy this week (Oh, the thrills of law school!) Rest assured, I will post something about it soon...Tomorrow at the earliest, Sunday night at the latest.

Have I lost my mind?

2006-03-03T22:28:00.000-08:00

Why am I asking myself the question that's the title of this post? Because I've gone ahead and created another Feingold blog!

Yes, to be a shameless follower of the trend of starting state Feingold blogs, I've started Missouri for Feingold.

Check it out! Then come back here and answer the title question!

Happy Birthday, Senator Feingold!

2006-03-02T21:00:00.000-08:00

A new post, less then a month after the last one...what's the special occasion? Well, today is the 53rd birthday of the Next President of the United States Russell Dana Feingold!

And I'm sure there is nothing Senator Feingold wants more for his birthday than for me to update this blog, so here I am. (And if Senator Feingold is reading this, please remember: it's the thought that counts!)

Of course, for those of you who (unlike me) don't have blogs and do have money you could follow the advice of Jerry Troiano over at New Jersey for Feingold and give Senator Feingold the gift of a contribution to the Progressive Patriots Fund.

After all, Senator Feingold spent his birthday trying to talk his colleagues into standing up for civil liberties and rejecting the bad deal on the reauthorization of the PATRIOT Act.

You can read his statement here. Here's the conclusion:

In 2001, we were viciously attacked by terrorists who care nothing for American freedoms and American values. And we as a people came together to fight back, and we are prepared to make great sacrifices to defeat those who would destroy us. But what we will not do, what we cannot do, is destroy our own freedoms in the process.

Without freedom, we are not America. If we don’t preserve our liberties, we cannot win this war, no matter how many terrorists we capture or kill.

That is why the several Senators who have said at one time or another during this debate things like, “Civil liberties do not mean much when you are dead” are wrong about America at the most basic level. They do not understand what this country is all about. Theirs is a vision that the founders of this nation, who risked everything for freedom, would categorically reject. And so do the American people.

Americans want to defeat terrorism, and they want the basic character of this country to survive and prosper. They want to empower the government to protect the nation from terrorists, and they want protections against government overreaching and overreacting. They know it might not be easy, but they expect the Congress to figure out how to do it. They don’t want defeatism on either score. They want both security and liberty, and unless we give them both – and we can, if we try – we have failed.

This fight is not over Mr. President. The vote today will not assuage the deep and legitimate concerns that the public has about the Patriot Act. I am convinced that in the end, the government will respond to the people, as it should. We will defeat the terrorists, and we will preserve the freedom and liberty that make this the greatest country on the face of the earth.

Senator Feingold had a bit more company today than in 2001. But not enough: the bill passed 89-10. My appreciation to Senators Akaka, Harkin, Levin, Bingaman, Wyden, Jeffords, Leahy, Murray, and Byrd.

And as someone who grew up in Illinois, I must say I'm very disappointed not to see either Senator Durbin or Senator Obama among those standing with Senator Feingold here.

New State Blogs: But, I guess this PATRIOT Act reauthorization vote, and Senator Feingold's words against it are one more reason why we have to work to put Russ in the White House in 2008! And, fortunately, the number of Feingold blogs continues to grow: a new Ohio for Feingold site is up and so is Mass(achusetts) for Feingold.

Does your state have a Feingold blog? If not, start one! If I can do it, anyone can!

Meetup Roundup: Didn't have a Feingold for President meetup in your town? Well, you can read all about the Iowa City Meetup and the New Brunswick (NJ) Meetup and maybe they'll give you ideas for starting your own. Also, note that Meetup groups have been formed for Denver and East Bay (Oakland, etc) California.

That's all for this time. Hopefully, I'll be able to update again, soon. Until next time, keep going Forward!

Happy Presidents' Day!

2006-02-18T20:49:00.000-08:00

Tomorrow, in Madison, Wisconsin, and Los Angeles, California, the first official Russ Feingold for President Meetups will occur; with another taking place in New Brunswick, New Jersey, on Monday. Monday, of course, is Presidents' Day and I can think of no better way to celebrate it than a Russ Feingold for President Meetup, and I wish I had the energy (and St. Louis had the progressive community) that I could have set one up.

Presidents' Day has its origins in George Washington's birthday, which is this Wednesday, so perhaps it is appropriate that I found some inspiration for our Feingold for President movement in this quote from a speech Jane Addams gave in 1903 at a celebration of Washington's Birthday:

What is a great man who has made his mark upon history? Every time, if we think far enough, he is a man who has looked through the confusion of the moment and has seen the moral issue involved; he is a man who has refused to have his sense of justice distorted; he has listened to his conscience until conscience becomes a trumpet call to like-minded men, so that they gather about him and together, with mutual purpose and mutual aid, they make a new period in history.

I don't know if there is a better example in recent American politics of looking through the confusion of the moment and seeing the moral issue involved than Senator Feingold's original lone Senate vote against the PATRIOT Act. And I don't think there is a better description of what is occurring on Feingold blogs and at Feingold Meetups than the part of that quote that I put in bold.

I was skeptical, at first, of the idea of starting Feingold for President Meetups this early, but now I see why they are needed: it's time for like-minded men and women to gather together in their communities and reach out to others there, spreading the word about a man of conscience from Wisconsin who, with our help, could take our country forward to a new period in history.

I look forward to hearing about the Meetups; I'll be there in spirit.

My usual apologies for not posting more often, I hope to post a longer update soon. Of course, I have lots of hopes, not all of them are realized...

(And, to give credit where it is due, I found the Jane Addams speech I quoted in the book Lend Me Your Ears: Great Speeches in History collected by William Safire, which my Mom bought me for Christmas and has quickly become one of my favorite books.)

Going Forward in the New Year

2006-01-16T22:05:00.000-08:00

Hello, everybody. My apologies for not posting more recently, I was out of town and without internet access for a few weeks and then spent the past week starting my new semester of law school. I'm gonna try to catch up with the major recent Feingold developments now; and once again I hope that I'll be able to update this site more regularly in the future.

Alito hearings: I'm sad and embarrassed to say that I probably caught about a total of an hour of the Alito hearings last week, and am not really qualified to comment on Senator Feingold's questioning of him. So if you weren't able to see it, check out Joe Pisciotto's coverage of it over at RussForPresident.com.

State Blogs: The number of Feingold for President state blogs doubled since the last time I updated this site...please check out and welcome New York for Feingold, California for Feingold, Feingold for President-Minnesota, and Pacific Northwest for Feingold (covering Washington and Oregon). Unfortunately, it looks like Ohio for Feingold has disappeared, but I'll keep my link to it in hope that it will return. So, if you live in a state not covered by a Feingold blog...what are you waiting for join the fun! Blog for Russ! It's easy to get started (if, admittedly, more difficult to keep up with on a regular basis).

And in an attempt to not be a total hypocrite, I have pondered either starting a Missouri for Feingold site, or, alternatively, changing this into a Missouri for Feingold site; leaning more towards the former than the latter for reasons that are as much sentimental and egotistical as anything else.

But the truth is I'd love it if a Missouri for Feingold site could be a collaborative thing, perhaps with bloggers for all different parts of the state...I don't know, maybe that's too ambitious, but if there is anyone in Missouri and interested email me . And the thoughts of all my readers are welcome on this (and any other) subject.

Also on the Net: Not a state blog, but a really cool idea is over at Irregular Times where they have started a President 2008 section, which is a wiki site which allows users to write and edit the text of the pages. The have sites for all the possible candidates, including our Senator Feingold, and I urge you to check it out and help it grow.

And if you want to help raise money for RussForPresident.com and own some nifty Russ related domain names for yourself, check out this eBay auction; it closes in four days.

Russ on the Road: No, the Feingold news hasn't been confined to the net and some really important hearings I haven't been able to watch. Senator Feingold headed out to New England, traveling to Vermont, to campaign for the great Bernie Sanders, and then to New Hampshire, a state which the political media pays a lot of attention to for some reason or another...

Senator Feingold gave great speeches at both events...and you can see them yourselves through the magic of the internet: Russ and Bernie is here, and the New Hampshire speech is available at C-SPAN .

Russ at home: I thought this story about one of Senator Feingold's more recent listening sessions was great. Other Feingold fans on the web have commented on the article's discussion of a Feingold for President sign in the crowd. That's good; but this was my favorite part:

And when one - and only one - person got up to say that he had voted
for Bush and wanted Feingold to vote to confirm Alito, to work on ending
legalized abortion and to oppose legalization of marriage between homosexuals,
and unhappy murmurs passed through audience, Feingold told everyone to stay
quiet.
"He has a right to say that," Feingold said. "I'll listen."

Huh, being respectful towards people who hold opposing viewpoints...what a truly revolutionary political idea.

Going Forward in the New Year: I didn't even get to do write about half the things I wanted to in this post; sometimes it seems like I have more ideas then I have time to use them when it comes to this site. I hope that will change; the number and enthusiasm of my fellow Feingold supporters on the web-two years before the election- is one of the most beautiful, amazing things I've seen in my short life. I can't wait to go Forward with Feingold in the new year!

And on that note, I thought I'd repost last year's most popular post, so here it is, for old time's sake and to welcome newcomers:

"Forward With Feingold"

I have many normal, obvious reasons for supporting Senator Feingold for President. There are his progressive positions on the issues, from trade to health care to Iraq. There is his willingness to take principled and independent stands-like his lone Senate vote against the PATRIOT Act. There is his straightforward yet affable personality. And then there are the less obvious, and rather strange, reasons I have for supporting Senator Feingold. Here's one: I love his state's motto.

Wisconsin's motto is very direct. It's just one word; it's not even in Latin. It's "Forward." I think that is a beautiful motto. Short, simple, and relevant. I wish I could make it the personal motto of all the politicians and pundits out there. I wish all the talking heads out there were looking forward-and talking about how to bring this country forward.

But sadly, that isn't what I hear. Instead I hear commentators who are always looking backwards insist that 2008 is, in fact, the exact same year as 1968 and Russ Feingold is Eugene McCarty, destined to split the Democratic Party and doom it to defeat in November. Or I hear that 2008 is actually 2004 and Senator Feingold is Howard Dean-a netroots liberal phenomenon destined to burnout and be defeated by someone more electable-who, in November, turns out to be not that electable after all.

Of course, not all of the commentators are constantly looking backwards-some are looking at the present, with incredibly myopic eyes. They can't see beyond the latest piece of conventional wisdom. "Senators can't win the presidency", they repeat, as though it was a natural law. "We must nominate a Southerner!" they insist, as though it was in the Constitution. "And it doesn't matter anyway, because Hillary will get the nomination!" they state with such absolute certainty that they must have traveled into the future and seen it come true.

Why is it that as America stands at the beginning of a new century, we can only think about the past or the present? Why do our political commentators insist on using flawed historical analogies or regurgitating stale, simplistic conventional wisdom? Why limit ourselves to looking backwards or looking at where we are right now? Why not follow the advice of Senator Feingold's state's motto and look forward?

And that is why I support Senator Feingold: because I'm looking forward towards a better future and because I'm willing to work to move America forward. And because I know that Senator Feingold will provide the leadership so that we can go forward.

We can go forward to an America where no one has to live in poverty.

We can go forward to an America where we all have health insurance and all our children can attend quality public schools.

We can go forward to an America that is both secure from terrorism and strong in its commitment to civil liberties.

We can go forward to an America where the government always works for the public interest, not for the special interests.

I firmly believe that working together we, the people of the United States of America, can move our country and the world forward towards new horizons of opportunity, justice and peace.

Let's go forward together! Let's go forward with Feingold!

PATRIOT Act Showdown

2005-12-16T07:01:00.000-08:00

Hey everyone...I really feel like I've been negligent in not posting earlier, but I had my first law school finals, and it was just one of those times where the whole outside world seemed to cease to exist, even our favorite senator. So, now for the news you already now...

PATRIOT Act: The House-Senate conference committee's final compromise on the PATRIOT Act renewal was not much of a compromise but rather abandoned all the reforms Russ and his Senate colleagues passed to improve that act...so now it's filibuster time. The vote on cloture should be later this morning, and according to the AP, Russ has the votes to sustain the filibuster.

Russ has been all over the media as a leading spokesman on the issue, including the NewsHour with Jim Lehrer debating the reauthorization with Senator Jeff Sessions; and blogging about the issue over at TPM's Table for One (the Senator seems to be becoming a more regular blogger than me!) I'm glad that it seems like the Senator's efforts will pay off, at least in defeating the motion for cloture today, and I would like to thank him, Senator Durbin, Senator Salazar, and especially Republican Senators Craig, Sununu, and Murkowski for standing up to the White House and the Republican leadership in Congress, and for standing up for our civil liberties! As Senator Feingold said, this is not a partisan issues, it's an American issue.

Also, as much as we like to talk about Russ' status as the only Senator to oppose to the PATRIOT Act in 2001, it is important note that he had some company: 66 members of the House of Representative opposed the PATRIOT Act originally, and they don't necessarily get the recognition they deserve so here they are:

Baldwin, Barrett, Blumenauer, Bonior, Boucher, Brown (OH), Capuano, Clayton, Conyers, Coyne, Cummings, Davis (IL), DeFazio, DeGette, Dingell, Farr, Filner, Frank, Hastings (FL), Hilliard, Honda, Jackson (IL), Jackson-Lee (TX), Johnson, E. B., Jones (OH), Kucinich, Lee, Lewis (GA), McDermott, McGovern, McKinney, Meek (FL), George Miller, Mink Mollohan, Nadler, Ney, Oberstar, Olver, Otter, Owens, Pastor, Paul, Payne, Peterson (MN), Rahall, Rivers, Rush, Sabo, Sanchez, Sanders, Schakowsky, Scott, Serrano, Stark, Thompson (MS), Tierney, Udall (CO), Udall (NM),Velazquez, Visclosky, Waters, Watson (CA), Watt (NC), Woolsey, Wu

My appreciation to them all.

Naturally some of the coverage about the PATRIOT Act debate and Russ's role in it have talked about it's impact on the 2008 primaries. I personally think the best summary about this was Schwompa's December 9th post over at Tennesseans for Feingold.

And speaking of state blogs: Yet another great new state blog for Feingold has been created, check out Ohio for Feingold. That makes five state blogs that I know of (New Jersey, Michigan, Tennessee, and Illinois as the others) so we are one tenth of the way to having Feingold supporter blogs in all 50 states! Let's keep going forward with this! Trust me, creating a blog isn't hard (having the time to update it, well, that's another story).

Happy anniversary: This Monday it was one year since my first post here. As far as I know, this was the first Feingold for President website out there; shortly after that DraftRuss.com came out and now there are all those great state sites in addition to the wonderful national efforts of RussForPresident.com and Friends of Feingold. This site is no longer "the" Russ Feingold for President site, as it was back when John Nichols mentioned it in his column a year ago today. And I couldn't be happier about that.

I am so thrilled and excited by the enthusiasm I've seen for Feingold on the netroots...from the state blogs, to his great performances in the MyDD and DailyKos straw polls, to the appreciation shown when Senator Feingold blogs...I find it incredible. When I started this site, I had no idea it would be possible that a year from then Senator Feingold would be considering a presidential bid and that he'd be mentioned as a possible candidate in almost every news story written about him. I would have seriously been happy if I just had a dozen or a hundred regular readers...instead I'm able to play a small role in a great movement, a movement that could help make Russ Feingold the next President of the United States!

I thank everyone who has read this blog, especially everyone who comments or emails me, and most especially everyone who's started their own blog, joined a Feingold yahoo group, made pro-Russ comments on MyDD or DailyKos or done anything else to help this movement.

I'm not sure if I'll be able to get online much over my break, so let me just repeat: Thank You! And let's keep going Forward in the new year!

Big News and a Commentary

2005-12-03T20:54:00.000-08:00

My usual apologies about not updating this blog nearly often enough.

Exciting News: Head on over to RussForPresident.com now, if you haven't in the past few days. Why? Because Senator Feingold will be having a Q and A over there, and you can submit your questions now by heading over there, registering, and posting them on the comments thread. Questions must be in by noon (central time) on Tuesday. This is a great opportunity for us, and a great indication of Senator Feingold's support for internet activism...let's make the most of it!

Some more exciting news over at RussForPresident.com is that the first issue of the "Forward" newsletter is out now...check it out, print it out, and hand it out to friends, family and strangers!

Commentary: Russ is a leader

One of the most frustrating criticisms I've encountered when promoting Senator Feingold around the web as a presidential candidate is that he is not and has never been a governor. That's hard to dispute. He does lack executive experience, but what is so important about executive experience anyway? I've thought about that a bit and realized that while most of the arguments in favor of governors as presidential candidates are fairly superficial (ie: they "communicate better" than senators) there is one very important thing that governors seem to have going for them over senators: leadership. A governor can point at everything good that happened in their state and claim that it is due to their leadership. A senator is only one of 100 people who vote on each bill. Does this mean that there are no leaders in Congress? Or that the only leaders are the committee chairs and others with titles designating them as leaders?

Hardly. Senators have a chance to be leaders every time they have to choose between voting in the best interests of the nation and voting for what is more popular, among Congress or among the country at large. And when faced with those votes Senator Feingold has always chosen to be a leader.

The examples are clear: the PATRIOT Act 99 to 1. The Iraq War Resolution 77 to 23. Senator Feingold had the choice to do what was politically expedient or do what was in the best interest of the country, and he chose the best interest of the country.

And after these votes Senator Feingold did not surrender to the then-majority views, rather he showed his leadership by continuing to work for the causes he believed in. And he got results.

When the PATRIOT Act was up for reauthorization this year, Senator Feingold fought to reform its harshest measures, and he and his Senate colleagues unanimously passed a reauthorization bill that made significant improvements in the act. (Check out this page from the Senator's website for more about the Senate bill's improvements in the PATRIOT Act.) And when the Senate leadership tried to force through a House-Senate "compromise" that would eliminate the reforms that are in the Senate version, Senator Feingold wouldn't stand for it and led a bipartisan group of senators who threatened to filibuster the bill over Thanksgiving weekend. The Senate leadership caved and thanks to Senator Feingold's leadership, this month will see a real debate in the Senate on how to protect America from terrorism while also protecting civil liberties.

Senator Feingold has also led the way in calling for the administration to come forward with a strategy and a timetable for bringing US troops home from Iraq. On June 14 of this year he called for a resolution asking the president to set a timeline for troop withdrawal. On August 17 he suggested a target date of December 31, 2006 for withdrawal. When he made that suggestion, only Barbara Boxer was willing to co-sponsor his resolution; fellow Democrats were openly critical of his suggestion. What a difference a couple of months makes. In mid-November all but five Democratic senators voted in favor of an amendment to the Defense Department authorization bill that called upon the President to set a timeline for withdrawing troops. And thanks to the courage of Congressman Jack Murtha, last month saw the beginning of a real debate about US policy in Iraq in both houses of Congress and across the country. I don't hear the Bush Administration talking about a "generational commitment" of US soldiers in Iraq anymore...and if you think the administration doesn't take Russ seriously, check this out.

The PATRIOT Act and Iraq are but two of the issues of the issues where Senator Feingold has been a leader and the rest of the Democrats in congress have finally started following him. Russ has opposed the annual Senate pay raise each year he has been in office, this year the Senate rejected it. Russ opposed corporate friendly "free trade" agreements throughout the 1990s, this year almost all the Democratic senators opposed CAFTA. Russ championed the McCain-Feingold bill in the Senate for years before it finally passed in the wake of Enron scandals.

This is important because in the 2008 primary elections all the Democratic candidates will say that they opposed the harsher provisions of the PATRIOT Act, that there were mistakes made in going to war in Iraq, that they think that "free trade should be fair trade." And yes, these are all positions where all Democrats are generally better than Republicans. But all Democrats are not the same.

I don't want the 2008 Democratic nominee to just be someone who says the right things on the campaign trail. I want the 2008 Democratic nominee to be someone with a vision for what is best for America and the courage to work for that vision regardless of the political risks. I want the 2008 Democratic nominee to be a leader.

I want the 2008 Democratic nominee to be Russ Feingold because he has the ability to be the leader that the Democratic Party and the country need.

Request: Can anybody help me find a transcript of Senator Feingold's appearance on "This Week" last week? I missed it, and I had difficulty trying to download the podcast of it.

This, of course, would be the appearance where he said that the US is "overdue for a cheesehead president." The bappearancee of this apppearance has to go to Daniel Owen at Oval Office 2008 who titled his story about it "Hail to the Cheese." I seriously think we should consider using that as a slogan.

That's all for this time, until next time, let's keep going Forward!

Three Small Things

2005-11-03T17:33:00.000-08:00

This is a very small update, especially by my standards, but it's stuff I think is worth mentioning:

First, the deadline to submit articles for the "Forward" newsletter described in my previous post has been extended to November 7. Check out RussForPresident.com for more info. Please do it if you have the time.

Second, I updated my links. Gone is the defunct NewPolitics1, up are another Feingold for President site, Friends of Feingold, and the great Wisconsin blog Forward Our Motto.

Third, yesterday my counter passed the 10,000 hits mark. That's not especially significant considering I added it a couple of months after I started the blog; and, also, about 5,000 of those hits are probably me checking to see if I had any new comments. But still, the other 5,000 hits...that's rather impressive. To me at least. So, thank you to all my visitors!

Let's keep going Forward!

"Forward" With Fitzy and Ilya...and YOU!

2005-10-29T22:34:00.000-07:00

Hey everybody, sorry I haven't been around in about a month. To assure anyone out there who may have been worrying I haven't moved to New Zealand or been eaten by llamas or anything like that...and I sure as heck haven't switched to supporting another candidate. I'm still all about going Forward With Feingold!

I'm afraid this law school stuff has been bogging me down. In fact I have a horrible assignment due on Monday, but I figured I've got an extra hour thanks to that whole "fall back" thing, and what better way to spend it than getting back in the blogging spirit?

Now for the main reason I wanted to get a post out today...Ilya at RussForPresident.com and Fitzy at Feingold for Michigan came up with the great idea of writing a newsletter about Senator Feingold and why we support him that we can all print out to give out at progressive events, or just to inform our friends, families, and complete strangers about the great junior senator from Wisconsin. The newsletter is going to be called "Forward" and you can see images of what it looks like now by following the RussForPresident link.

But, you see, there's a problem...it still needs some more articles. As Ilya writes:

But we need YOUR help. We're looking for articles on the Senator's plan in Iraq, his vote against the Patriot Act or any other topic that interests you. Please submit your original submission either in the comments section here, or e-mail it directly to isheyman[at]gmail.com. Below is a screenshot of where we're at right now. This is your chance to get directly involved with the effort and spread the word about Sen. Feingold. Please e-mail your submissions by Monday October 31st. Who knows, perhaps a really good submission will result in a mystery prize?

So if you act now you have the chance to help spread the word about Russ and win a mystery prize? What could make this even more worthwhile? Well, as you may have noticed one of the articles in the newsletter is my own "Forward With Feingold" post...so you also get the chance to see your name, in ink (if you print it out) in the same paper as mine, the great Dan K., friend and hero to one and all! And really, isn't that enough of a prize in and of itself? The answer, of course, would be no.

But this really is a great opportunity to help spread the word about Russ so I urge all of you to write and submit something if you have the time. And you should have the time because of that extra "fall back" hour. So there is no excuse. Go write about Russ now!

Actually I've got a few more things to say...

"Forward With Feingold" Followup: Well, as the above gave some indication of, my "Forward With Feingold" post got a pretty positive response from my fellow Feingold supporters, which I find tremendously flattering as I, of course, have absolutely no idea what I'm doing here. I'm especially honored that my crossposting at MyDD.com was a recommended diary for a couple of days and had an obscenely large number of comments...thankfully none of which were obscene.

A number of Feingold supporters have told me it that it would be a really good slogan for the Draft Feingold effort. Maybe it would be...but in order to be a REALLY good slogan it's got to be out there for there people to see, and that's where you come in. See, really all I can do is write stuff and post it here (and also at MyDD and RussForPresident.com) but you guys post things all across the internet, so if you haven't already, why not help spread the word by adding "Forward With Feingold" or whatever pro-Feingold message you want to your signatures in your emails and on whatever blogs and message boards you post on. And don't forget a link to RussForPresident.com, or the Progressive Patriots Fund or the Senator's home page, so anybody who is curious can find out what the excitement's about.

And, just to go forward with this some more, if anyone has any ideas for graphics that could be used for blogads, website banners, etc., based around the "Forward With Feingold" slogan, I'd love to see them. As you might have guessed from the, uh, "modest" look of my blog, I really can't do much with computers beside get online and type...so I'll need the help of those who can do more if this kind of stuff will ever get done. Mind you, I'm not announcing a contest or anything...mainly because I'm too lazy and cheap to come up with a prize yet...so, for now this just an idea that I've had floating around in my head and decided to let loose.

And for one more, even sillier, idea to throw out there...do we have any songwriters out there looking for a challenge? If so, why not try to write a "Forward With Feingold" song! I, for one, yearn for the days of great presidential campaign songs like "His Grandfather's Hat", "Be Sure That Woodrow Wilson Leads the Band", and "Get on the Raft with Taft", so if you do too, why not get songwritin'...anybody who writes a "Forward With Feingold" song will win...my eternal admiration!

Well it's something.

Seriously, if anybody is interested in any of these "Forward With Feingold" ideas or has any of their own please post a comment or email me. Seriously, nothing more can happen without YOU.

Remembering Paul Wellstone: Tuesday of this past week marked the third anniversary of the tragic death of a hero to many of us and a friend and colleague of Senator Feingold's, the late Senator Paul Wellstone. This is one of those occasions where I feel that others can say things much better than I, so please read Fitzy's post on the subject.

And if you've never read it before, read Senator Feingold's tribute to Senator Wellstone from November of 2002.

Paul fought for justice for children who didn't have enough to eat. He fought for environmental justice, even for the poor side of town. He fought for social justice when it came to access to health care. He fought for economic justice when it came to a fair minimum wage and the ability of working families to protect themselves under the bankruptcy law. And he fought for justice among nations, and for peace. Paul Wellstone was the very embodiment of justice.

And so, Paul Wellstone, here on the Senate floor, there is a whole in our hearts. We will miss you, dear friend.

But we will still look for you. For wherever it is - on this Senate floor, at a political rally, or at a town hall meeting somewhere on a cold, windy day in the heartland of America - whenever someone speaks for justice, Paul Wellstone will be there.

That's all for this time. Until next time, keep going Forward!

Russ and Roberts

2005-09-30T16:38:00.000-07:00

Hey folks, sorry I wasn't able to post more recently. I've either been busy with law school work or too tired to do anything. But now that I finally have enough free time and energy to do something, I'm back and blogging! You know, I hear some of my fellow law students spend their free time going to bars or parties or something, but not me. I devote all my free time to you, the Feingold fans!

You should be honored, of course.

Okay, seriously now, on to the news.

Last Minute Notice: Senator Feingold is on C-SPAN right now (Friday at 6:30 central) giving a speech at the Rockingham County Democratic Party's Eleanor Roosevelt Dinner.

Oh, to make that more interesting, that would be Rockingham County NEW HAMPSHIRE.

Hopefully, this will be replayed later and posted on C-SPAN's website. I'll try to keep you informed on that.

Now on to the big story...

Russ and Roberts: Yesterday, John Roberts was sworn in as the 17th Chief Justice of the United States. He passed the Senate confirmation vote 78-22. He would have become Chief Justice with or without Russ Feingold's support. It happened to be with Senator Feingold's support.

Am I surprised by this? Somewhat, given the Senator's strong questioning of Roberts in the Judiciary Committee hearings.

Am I disappointed? No. After it became clear that Roberts was going to replace Chief Justice Rehnquist, rather then Sandra Day O'Connor, I didn't consider the Roberts confirmation to be that important of a battle. Yes, he is a conservative partisan Republican. So was his predecessor. I don't think Roberts is incompetent, corrupt, or holds legal views that are ridiculously out of the mainstream. I'm not sure how I would have voted if I was a senator, but I don't think there was a really good reason to keep Roberts off the bench. Senator Feingold's statement before the judiciary committee's vote is here. I think it's worth reading.

Does this vote change my opinion of Senator Feingold as a Senator or a possible presidential candidate? Not by one iota.

Somehow, the rest of the liberal blogosphere doesn't quite see it this way. Since the vote in the judiciary committee, I've seen quite a few people refer to Senator Feingold as "yet another spineless Dem kowtowing to the Bush Administration" and have heard that he has committed political suicide as far as his presidential hopes go. More kindly, and quite paradoxically, I've seen the Senator's vote called a political move to help him appeal to moderate voters in the 2008 primaries. (I'm sure many moderate voters are thinking about the 2008 primaries now, and that the Roberts vote is the most important issue to them. And your sarcasm detectors should be going off the charts there.)

So has Senator Feingold become another spineless Dem? Or is he off pandering to the moderates, now that he assume he has his liberal base locked up (in the elections that don't begin for about two and a half years and which he might not even run in)?

No, I'm afraid the there is a simpler explanation. Russ Feingold is just being Russ Feingold.

Maybe that needs some explanation, especially to people who have just recently become interested in Senator Feingold. While it is true that Senator Feingold is, perhaps, the most progressive member of the Senate, he's not just a kneejerk partisan Democrat. He doesn't always do what the base of the party would like him to. He voted to confirm John Ashcroft and Condi Rice, too. And he doesn't always do what the leaders of the party would like him to do. He was one of three Senate Democrats to speak out against Bill Clinton's use of military force in Kosovo. He was also the only Senate Democrat to vote against dismissing the impeachment charges against Clinton without hearing the evidence (after the trial, he found Clinton not guilty.)

It would be fair to say Senator Feingold is a maverick, but he isn't a maverick just for the sake of being one. He is a maverick because he always stays true to his own principles regardless of popular opinion or the party line. While I'm sure he could describe his own principles better than I, I think a very short summary of it would be that he really believes in the Constitution of the United States and the way our system of government is supposed to work. For him, that sometimes means voting for qualified presidential nominees he doesn't agree with at all, rather then turning their confirmation hearings into yet another partisan battle. It also means wanting to hear the evidence in a trial to impeach the President of the United States, even though they're from the same party. Personally, I think this whole "principles before partisanship" thing is a big reason why Senator Feingold would make a great president. I think real political leadership means occasionally doing things that are not popular among members of your own party, or even the population as a whole, because they are in the best interest of the country. Others seem to think that a great political leader is someone who always agrees with them 100% of the time. Those people would be better off not supporting Senator Feingold. And instead casting a write-in for themselves.

That said, I can understand why some of his supporters might be disappointed in Senator Feingold for this vote. All I can say to them is that it is just one vote I don't think it is close to being enough to cancel out all the countless ways in which Senator Feingold has been a leader of the progressive cause. He remains the only Senator to advocate a timeline for withdrawal from Iraq and the only Senator to cast a vote against the PATRIOT Act. He has been fighting against corporate dominated free trade agreements for his entire senate career. And he has one of the best records out there on the environment, health care, women's rights and other progressive causes.

I can understand the visceral desire of some in the liberal blogosphere to treat every vote like it is the most important vote-EVER! And to believe that all Dems who vote the other way are TRAITORS! But, that's simply not true. While I wholeheartedly agree that the Democrats should stand united and fight all the important battles against the Bush Administration, I'm just not sure this was one. Remember that both of Clinton's Supreme Court nominees were confirmed with less than 10 votes against them. I don't think that means that the Republicans were an ineffective opposition.

Finally, remember that in these partisan struggles what goes around comes around. As Senator Feingold noted:

History has shown that control of the White House, and with it the power to shape the courts, never stays for too long with one party. When my party retakes the White House, there may very well be a Democratic John Roberts nominated to the Court, a man or woman with outstanding qualifications, highly respected by virtually everyone in the legal community, and perhaps with a paper trail of political experience or service on the progressive side of the ideological spectrum. When that day comes, and it will, that will be the test for this Committee and the Senate. And, in the end, it is one of the central reasons I will vote to confirm Judge John Roberts to be perhaps the last Chief Justice of the United States in my lifetime.

That's all I have for this week, I'll update when I have the time.

Forward With Feingold

2005-09-11T09:28:00.000-07:00

My apologies for not updating more recently. First, it was a matter of me not having the time; then, after Katrina hit the the gulf coast, blogging about the 2008 presidential election seemed a lot less important. But I found I had something I really wanted to write, and now was as good a time as any to write it.

First Things First: Please, if you can spare anything, make a donation to help the victims of Hurricane Katrina. Thank you.

Feingold News and Notes: I had originally planned on writing a larger post on Senator Feingold's visit to L.A. in late August and the National Security speech he gave there, but for right now that's not happening. However, a transcript of the Senator's speech is available here at the Progressive Patriots Fund site. I haven't read it all yet myself, but I'm sure it's worth a read.
The front page for the Progressive Patriots Fund also details some of the Senator's efforts to help hurricane victims, most notably his work to ease the restrictions of the harsh new bankruptcy bill that is going into effect in October. It's worth reading about here.

Finally, in less important but exciting news, RussForPresident.com has raised enough money to start running blogads. They had five ads submitted and a very clever vote-through-donations thing to raise the money and determine the favorite ad. I was not able to donate then, but my favorite ad won anyway. ("Pop Quiz" by Jerry Troiano) I'll post the ad here when I remember how to do that. In addition, it is now posted at SmirkingChimp.com and MyLeftWing.com. Way to go RussForPresident folks!

And Now, Our Feature Presentation: Here's what I really needed to write. Since Senator Feingold announced his proposal for a timeline to end U.S. involvement in Iraq a number of columnists across the political spectrum, most notably Pat Buchanan, have compared him to Eugene McCarthy in 1968, and insisted that his anti-war stance will lead to disunity and defeat for the Democrats. Even before that, I've seen Senator Feingold compared to past candidates ranging from Bobby Kennedy to George McGovern to Howard Dean. Sometimes these comparisons are favorable, sometimes they aren't. Either way, they bothered me. This campaign, and all campaigns, need to be about the future, not the past. I thought about just posting an angry, stream of consciousness rant about this, but then I came up with a better idea. What I ended up writing was a commentary-I think of it as a very brief surrogate stump speech-that tied this idea into why I support Senator Feingold.

Here it goes:
"Forward with Feingold"

I have many normal, obvious reasons for supporting Senator Feingold for President. There are his progressive positions on the issues, from trade to health care to Iraq. There is his willingness to take principled and independent stands-like his lone Senate vote against the PATRIOT Act. There is his straightforward yet affable personality. And then there are the less obvious, and rather strange, reasons I have for supporting Senator Feingold. Here's one: I love his state's motto.

Wisconsin's motto is very direct. It's just one word; it's not even in Latin. It's "Forward." I think that is a beautiful motto. Short, simple, and relevant. I wish I could make it the personal motto of all the politicians and pundits out there. I wish all the talking heads out there were looking forward-and talking about how to bring this country forward.

But sadly, that isn't what I hear. Instead I hear commentators who are always looking backwards insist that 2008 is, in fact, the exact same year as 1968 and Russ Feingold is Eugene McCarty, destined to split the Democratic Party and doom it to defeat in November. Or I hear that 2008 is actually 2004 and Senator Feingold is Howard Dean-a netroots liberal phenomenon destined to burnout and be defeated by someone more electable-who, in November, turns out to be not that electable after all.

Of course, not all of the commentators are constantly looking backwards-some are looking at the present, with incredibly myopic eyes. They can't see beyond the latest piece of conventional wisdom. "Senators can't win the presidency", they repeat, as though it was a natural law. "We must nominate a Southerner!" they insist, as though it was in the Constitution. "And it doesn't matter anyway, because Hillary will get the nomination!" they state with such absolute certainty that they must have traveled into the future and seen it come true.

Why is it that as America stands at the beginning of a new century, we can only think about the past or the present? Why do our political commentators insist on using flawed historical analogies or regurgitating stale, simplistic conventional wisdom? Why limit ourselves to looking backwards or looking at where we are right now? Why not follow the advice of Senator Feingold's state's motto and look forward?

And that is why I support Senator Feingold: because I'm looking forward towards a better future and because I'm willing to work to move America forward. And because I know that Senator Feingold will provide the leadership so that we can go forward.

We can go forward to an America where no one has to live in poverty.

We can go forward to an America where we all have health insurance and all our children can attend quality public schools.

We can go forward to an America that is both secure from terrorism and strong in its commitment to civil liberties.

We can go forward to an America where the government always works for the public interest, not for the special interests.

I firmly believe that working together we, the people of the United States of America, can move our country and the world forward towards new horizons of opportunity, justice and peace.

Let's go forward together! Let's go forward with Feingold!
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And, that's where the speech would have to end because everyone would be throwing rocks at me.

Seriously, I'd really like to know your reactions to what I wrote. Email and comments are always welcome. If you think it's horrible, let me know. If you think it's the greatest piece of political writing since JFK's inaugural address, you are quite delusional, but I would like to hear from you, too!

That's it for now, except for a tip of the hat to the pro-Russ Wisconsin political blog Forward Our Motto for introducing me to the great motto of the state of Wisconsin.