Progressive Leader Feingold Split Over Clinton, Obama

Post Crescent:

Sen. Russ Feingold has a plan. Getting ready to head back to Washington as Congress is about to resume, the Democratic senator from Wisconsin has compiled a list of his top five domestic agenda items for 2008: a health care proposal, changes to the No Child Left Behind Act, improving public financing of presidential campaigns, strengthening the Clean Water Act and giving the president line-item veto powers....

...I did notice that as the primaries heated up, all of a sudden, all the presidential candidates -- none of whom voted with me on the timeframe to withdraw from Iraq -- all voted with me and when we did the Patriot Act stuff.

The one that is the most problematic is (John) Edwards, who voted for the Patriot Act, campaigns against it. Voted for No Child Left Behind, campaigns against it. Voted for the China trade deal, campaigns against it. Voted for the Iraq war ... He uses my voting record exactly as his platform, even though he had the opposite voting record.

Read the whole story: Post Crescent

Comments

[Mauiloa]

If there is one senator who has consistently voted the way a liberal should vote, it's Feingold. Therefore it's interesting to get his take on the three frontrunners.

I was leaning towards Edwards based on some of the Michael Moore's reasoning, but he was evaluating Edwards on what he is saying today and not on the apparent hypocrisy as shown by his voting record.

It's unfortunate that the most honest people in congress, like Dennis Kucinich, becomes an object of ridicule.

And why? Because of his size!

Russ Feingold decided long ago that he couldn't run for President under a system that requires a campaigner to sell his ethics and morals for media money.

What we are left with is three candidates we really don't know. All we know is what they tell us.

But we've all been fooled before, haven't we?

[godlessclif]

Feingold's five item list is kind of weak.Here is a left wing list.
1.End the war in Iraq and Afghanistan immediately
2.Repeal the Taft Hartley Law, anti-union legislation and ban the hiring of permanent replacement workers during strikes.
3. End the Federal Reserve System and have the treasury control the money supply. Re-instate usury laws and bankruptcy laws.
4. Institute single payer health care for all citizens
5. Eliminate the Homeland Security department,return control to Military/Naval Intelligence and legitimate local police

[godlessclif]

Feingold's five item list is kind of weak.
Here is a left wing list.
1.End the war in Iraq and Afghanistan immediately
2.Repeal the Taft Hartley Law, anti-union legislation and ban the hiring of permanent replacement workers during strikes.
3. End the Federal Reserve System and have the treasury control the money supply. Re-instate usury laws and bankruptcy laws.
4. Institute single payer health care for all citizens
5. Eliminate the Homeland Security department,
return control to Military/Naval Intelligence

return control to military intelegence legitimate local police.

[SearchingForPericles]

I think Russ needs some changes and additions to his domestic agenda.

Health Care: the idea that we need to create state labs to see what works is ridiculous! Just look around the world for Christ's sake. Still, baby steps.

Clean Air Act: repeal the provisions of the Clean Air Act that create Federal preemption in regulating emissions from automobiles, thus preventing states from enacting standards more stringent than the federal standards.

Voting: All states must have a verifiable paper trail before November. I can't believe Dem's haven't been able to get this done yet. At least make Bush veto the damned thing.

[Average]

How can something as small as his mind be split!!!

[ResistanceisFutile]

I like Russ, he's my Senator. He voted against the war, the Patriot Act (he actually read it before voting) and other attacks on our constitution.

I find it hard to beleive he would even consider supporting Clinton. Clinton voted for a war and every attack on the Constitution.

[liberalrebuttal]

Go Russ ! Tell it like it is. You are right. I hope you follow the wisdom of OUR Governor and endorse the only candidate that can unite the country.

On Wisconsin and Go Pack Go !

[WorkingClass]

John Edwards is a leper. The oligarchy will make sure that he has no future in politics and to support him now would be to make the WRONG enemies. Kucinich and now Feingold are pushing Edwards away. People are falling over each other to endorse Obama, the media darling. Feingold's failure to endorse Edwards is a mark against Feingold not Edwards. The corporate media is doing its best to destroy Edwards. If they are against him, I am for him, no matter what.

[geobushono]

Russ, You and Senator Sanders are the beacons of enlightenment in the Senate, and WE look to you for grounded progressive leadership.
You know the metrics of clinton and obama's strengths.
For OUR purposes, Obama will deliver an administration more in tune with the working people.
Just remember Russ; Clinton/Nafta/Rubin....that brings us up today.
That's the history. Thank you. gb

[Kungfublood]

Please do not pretend that we have an election due to the Massive vote fraud call congress your news paper and radio and demand! demand!demand! that the whole process be started over from scratch! or get back to were you all belong -the USSR.
http://www.bbvforums.org/cgi-bin/forums/board-auth.cgi?file=/1954/71404.html
-----------------------
http://www.bbvforums.org/cgi-bin/forums/board-auth.cgi?file=/1954/71404.html
--------------------------
http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Are_2008_elections_headed_for_another_0117.html

[MNmommy]

So funny.

Many would love for Feingold to be in this race, but should he not speak kindly or not someone's candidate, he's toast.

What a fickle lot y'all are.

I find myself agreeing with everything he said, right down to the difficult choice of candidate.

I will vote for whomever the nominee is.

[TellitLikeItIs]

Senator Feingold is a big disappointment in regards to his statements dissing John Edwards. Especially when viewing the side-by-side comparison of Edwards' voting record with Hillary's voting record on the same key issues.

Hey, Russ----Why no criticism of Hillary? Why no mention that Hillary and Edwards were pretty much voting the same way back in 2003-04? Maybe Russ is afraid Bill will jump full throttle on his a** they way he's been jumping everyone elses' lately!! Very unattractive of the former President, as I've posted on previous HuffPo threads.

Russ' dissing of Edwards may explain something I've had a hunch about for awhile. Awhile ago, in a correspondence I had with someone in Russ' office, I mentioned something about "corporate Hillary". I received no reply or comment from this person. Dead silence speaks volumes, sometimes. If Russ supports Hillary, I'm done with Russ' "Progressive Patriots". Hillary is about as progressive as "Joementum" Lie-berman. I guess you really can't trust anybody. Sad, sad, sad. Although Dennis is first on my list, I'll take Edwards over Clinton.

[Querent]

I have been supporting Edwards. He is clear as a bell on ideology, in fact, I can't fault him on a single issue. His only weakness is his extremely conservative voting record. Each of the Democrats wants to be the progressive candidate. The question about Edwards is, how real is his commitment?
Feingold's comment carries a lot of mojo for me. He is easily the most admirable senator in the progressive movement. In fact, in a way, he is the progressive movement. Feingold not only has the ideology, he has the proven voting record to go with it. To hear him say that Edwards' record is the opposite of his is a serious denunciation. As you say, hatbox, it's clear Feingold doesn't trust Edwards. That rings alarm bells for me.

I am now transitioning to uncommitted. To win my vote in the primary, Clinton or Obama must make serious representations that their claim to be progressives are true. If I'm picking on ideology alone, I'm picking Edwards. He knows that the Constitution must be restored. Item one.

So the other two must show me more. I want a real commitment to the progressive cause, and I would prefer it be in the form of a commitment to stand wide of any judicial proceedings against actions against the Bush administration.

In other words, I want a promise of no pardon for Bush. No amnesty for Bush admin. officials. No moving on and not looking back. None of that kind of shit. Whichever major candidate promises me that gets my vote. That means Edwards, too. Such a pledge would be practically the only proof Edwards, not being in office, could provide. So it counts.

Maybe I should change my handle to TemporarilyUncommited.

[knosiswar]

Senator, Ask yourself, who will Hillary select as her VP, I'm betting on Rahm Emanuel, Head House Triangulator for the DLC.

[ProudLiberalDan]

Senator Feingold proved you can win an election and not take a dime from corporations. In fact, future candidates should sign pledges

I'm sure he'll support whoever the nominee is.

I'm sure he's having the same problems making decision many people are having.

Do you go with your heart and support longshot Edwards even though his upset win would lose the best opportunity to make history by electing the first ________ as President.

Do you go for the one who has a more detailed and plausible policy platform, but who was very wrong on Iraq, is uninspiring and half the country won't vote for, but is vetted and not naive about what the GOP will do to hold onto power?

Do you go for the inspirational speaker who's policy platform is vague, who's health care plan isn't universal and leaves out 15 million on paper, and who seems incredibly naive about bringing corporations and conservatives to the table to make "change", but was right on Iraq, and is the most charismatic candidates the Democrats have seen in 40 plus years?

Not an easy decision for many people.

For me, I'm voting my heart for Kucinich or Edwards. I'll let others worry about the Clinton v. Obama bout, and I'll vote in the fall for whichever one is the nominee.