"Maverick" Feingold Is New Democratic Face with Same Message

The Democratic Party has a new face in the spotlight…
With the same old Democratic message.

“Maverick” Senator, Russ Feingold (D-WI), is having a difficult time gaining support for his call to formally censure President Bush.

A pity.


Daily Kos contributor, Russ Feingold is the current voice of today’s Democratic Party. It is sad to see him shunned by his associates in the Senate who are not honest enough to stand with the Senator in agreement. Instead, they sneak away from cameras and media folk so that they are not forced to make a public statement on the resolution to censure President Bush, a reasonable first step in condemning his actions.

Senator Feingold and Senators John McCain, Hillary Rodham Clinton, Lindsey Graham and Susan Collins with US servicemen and women in Baghdad. (Picture from Feingold website)… Feingold concluded in the wake of his trip to Iraq that the occupation was doing more harm than good–both to the future of Iraq and to America’s global national security interests.

Russ Feingold is the past, present and the future of today’s Democratic Party.
Just look at the bold stands this gutsy senator from Wisconsin has made since Al Qaeda murdered over 3,000 US citizens on 9-11.

Back in 2001, Russ said, “While the Constitution protects against invasions of individual rights, it is not a suicide pact.” Then he was the only senator to vote no on the Patriot Act.

In 2002, when Saddam’s top generals believed there were chemical and biological weapons stockpiles in Iraq, US generals believed Saddam had weapons of mass destruction, top democrats said Saddam had weapons, along with the experts and the rest of the world, Russ Feingold voted against the resolution for War in Iraq.

As far as securing America’s borders and reducing immigration, Russ gets a D- rating for career acheivement.

Russ called for a set exit strategy for Iraq back in August, 2005. He stressed that his deadline comes “with flexibility,” a caveat that some critics say renders it close to meaningless. Yet, this was months before Pink Hawk Representative Murtha came out with his cut and run strategy.

Then in December, 2005, Feingold led a filibuster which prevented the House-approved version of the Patriot Act from becoming law.

Again, in February, 2006, Russ Feingold said, “I Strongly Oppose Patriot Act Deal.”

Feingold again voted against the Patriot Act but with 8 other democratic senators and one “independent” senator joining him this time on the March 9, 2006 vote.

As of June 2005, the Patriot Act is credited with helping to convict more than 200 terrorists. It has been used to break up terrorist cells in New York, Oregon, Virginia and Florida. The information gleaned from NSA electronic surveillance is also creditied with preventing attacks and saving lives.

But, democrats have a new “Maverick” sporting the same old message. As long as there is Iran threatening to “crush America”, “wipe Israel off the map” and produce nuclear weapons. And, as long as their are terrorists blowing up bombs weekly in India or Pakistan or Iraq or Europe or Egypt…

This same old Democratic message may get headlines from the liberal media but it won’t win in America, no matter who the “Maverick” is.

Michelle Malkin says, “All Hail Russ Feingold.”
GOP.com sees that democrats have finally found their agenda.
The Anchoress is as hard on Frist as she is on Feingold.
GOP.com also has a petition that you can quickly sign to tell Democrats to “Stand Up and Quit Weakening Our National Defense!”
(I think it will take more than a petition to see that happen.)
Texas Rainmaker has more on this fighting plan by the Socialist Party.

The Wall Street Journal … “[Sen. Feingold is] doing voters a favor by telling them before November’s election just how Democrats intend to treat a wartime President if they take power.” (Editorial, “The Impeachment Agenda,”)

After seeing Howard Dean’s response to attacks on Feingold’s “bravery”, Powerline adds:

“It looks as though the Democrats are trying to deflect attention from their own embarrassment over Feingold’s blunder by changing the subject to purported attacks on Feingold’s patriotism.”

Hugh Hewitt sees the seriousness of the flawed assertions by Feingold.

You Might Like