There is a movement afoot among many who are disgusted with the Bush Administration and their Republican cronies and with the Democrats in Congress who offer only the meekest of opposition to such (a.k.a. Republican-Lite). The movement is to draft Senator Russ Feingold, D-Wisconsin, to run for President in 2008. I am beginning to think that Mr. Feingold would be the ideal candidate. He has been among the most vocal and consistent opponents of the President’s policies, particularly with regard to how such have negatively impacted our civil liberties. In 2001, Senator Feingold was the only member of the U.S. Senate who had the courage and conviction to vote against the USA Patriot Act. Yesterday, the Senator stood up before his colleagues and eloquently decried the illegality of the Bush Administration’s domestic surveillance program, demanding that the President and the Attorney General be held accountable for violating the law and that the members of Congress do more than cheer the President on. (The transcript for this speech, which is well worth reading, can be found here: “On The President’s Warrantless Wiretapping Program.�) I applaud Senator Feingold’s efforts and would support his run for the presidency in 2008. Anyone interested in the movement to draft the Senator for such a run should check out the following two websites: russforpresident.com and draftruss.com.
2 thoughts on “The Russelling Of A Movement”
Comments are closed.
very inetresting. obviously everyone is talking hillary for 2008, edwards will obviously make another run at it, but i could see russ getting some momentum…
I hadn’t heard Feingold mentioned as a potential candidate before now. His positions seem sound; don’t know how he comes across on TV, and, let’s face it, that’s crucial. I suspect that had a lot to do with the failure of Wes Clarke to catch on in ’04.
I just really hope Hillary doesn’t run. The right-wing sound machine would be ferocious. And there’s been some gratuitous bashing of Barack Obama of late; it was a bit perplexing until one of the other bloggers (Talking Points Memo?) pointed out how the Reps do this to put down an “image” in the public’s mind. Unfortunately, Hillary would suffer tremendously from these sort of ‘short-hand’ attacks on her. “No need to explain, we already know she’s evil” nudge-nudge-wink-wink. Considering how effective this was with Gore, I don’t think Hillary could get any fair coverage of her ideas.
My objection is strategic/tactical, not meaning anything negative about Hillary.
So, yeah. Feingold. As in McCain-Feingold. It’s a possibility.