Feingold for President?
Feingold just keeps getting better and better. Yesterday, he came out for ensuring Presidential accountability:
“I think there is an orderly and dignified way to find out what happened,” said Russ Feingold of Wisconsin. “And, if there was a legal violation there needs to be accountability … you can’t put the cart before the horse, but I would not rule out any form of accountability.”
That would include impeachment, Feingold told reporters.
Feingold has had a remarkable run in the last year or so. He was the first senator to come out for a timed withdrawal, which instantly gave the issue credibility, and, more impressively, he put together a bipartisan coalition that killed the PATRIOT Act extension that Bush favored in the Senate. And now he says, out loud, that a President who broke the law should be held accountable, up to an including the point of impeachment. From a stand point of Constitutional liberty, there isn’t anyone running for President right now that is either on the right side more consistently or has been more effective at protecting those Constitutional liberties.
2008 is a long way away, but right now Feingold is my pick.
Feingold gets a kudo from me for being the only senator to vote against the original Patriot Act. But, Feingold would get my desparate opposition, as would McCain, because of McCain-Feingold “campaign finance reform”. (If I could put that in scarier scare quotes I would). Free speech is too important.
http://mccain-feingold-insurrection.blogspot.com/
I believe Feingold and McCain have both said they never intended it to apply to blogs, but as ignorance of the law is no excuse in court, ignorance of the law you sponsor is far worse.
Despite the outcry that makes it unlikely that there will be an attempt to enforce it soon, say if I post endorsing Feingold’s opponent shortly before the 2008 election, I regard this attack on the people’s free speech to be the most serious new infringement of Constitutional liberties in the past decade.
He’s also recently pro-gun and opposed the awb renewal, which is good. but i can’t get passed mccain feingold.
I find it exceptionally confusing that anyone would think that McCain-Feingold is the worse civil liberties violation than USA PATRIOT. The campaign finance reform bill was, in my estimation, a decent idea poorly executed. I’d be far, far happier if someone simply passed a “money != speech” law; that would solve many of the problems.
But people who have supported Bush (and some who still do) think that McCain-Feingold is some kind of automatic disqualifier? Sounds like exceptionally skewed priorities to me.
Frankly, if McCain-Feingold is the worst anyone can say about Feingold, put me first in line to support him.
Uncle:
Put it like this: If you could do away with McCain-Feingold by reinstating the AWB, would you? Of course you wouldn’t. So I’m still confused as to why all the emphasis on McCain-Feingold. It looks to me like you’re looking for an excuse not to like him.
Check out the McCain-Feingold Insurrection site for some idea about how seriously we’ve taken this for how long. It’s not like all the sudden we found a reason not to like him because you mentioned him for President. Note that we feel the same about McCain.
It is fairly rare that any direct and overt attempt to control specifically political speech is made. This is one of them.
Never said it was worse. Just that I can’t get passed it. It’s a pretty bad law. But of the candidates so far, he’s the front runner for me.
“I find it exceptionally confusing that anyone would think that McCain-Feingold is the worse civil liberties violation than USA PATRIOT.”
Basically, here’s the deal. McCain-Feingold restricts free speech, PA allows treatment of US citizens like wartime saboteurs. With free speech, even secret arrests can be challenged in the penultimate court of voting them out, if the neighbors notice the arrestee is missing. The logistics aren’t present to arrest us all, especially the armed ones. Without free speech, voting is meaningless; the only recourse is revolution.
PA is certainly more unpleasant for any innocent victims, but doesn’t pose the same level of threat to democracy. Habeas corpus & trial by jury are something I’d expect from democracy, but regularly disappear in wartime. Free speech is essential to there being a meaningful democracy at all.
If Feingold were to say McCain-Feingold were a mistake that didn’t do what he wanted it to do, and his pro-gun position seemed legit, he’d get my vote over say McCain or Giuliani. If Condi Rice or Larry Craig or Ron Paul were to run, it’d be different.
[...] As Feingold positions himself for a presidential run in 2008, I hear a lot of complaints (see here and here) from the right and from libertarian types about McCain-Feingold, and how seriously this subverts my free speech rights. I’ll be the first to admit that I don’t know much about McCain-Feingold, so can someone please explain to me, in layman’s terms, precisely what I could legally say before McCain-Feingold that I can’t legally say now? [...]
McCain/Feingold legislation is just another reason to support Russ Feingold for president. He worked over six years to tackle one of the most persistant problems for both sides of the aisle. He also passed it with one of the most respectable republicans around.
The other legislators voted for this so obviously the right did not have too many problems with it. What is the point of freedom of speech if you are corralled by riot police at every single political function anyway. I don’t see people up in arms about that. At the conventions this past year had massive arrests and “Free Speech Zones”
Republican gatherings about national policy such as the social security town hall meetings were staged and people with anti bush shirts and bumperstickers were forcibly ejected from numerous meetings. This administration paid newscasters to support thier agenda and encouraged purgery.
The NSA and the FBI is watching peace groups and the NYPD is putting under cover officers into political rallies. We have SERIOUS constitutional issues right now. Russ has been on the right side. The rights in the constitution are for individuals. It would be nice if we could have PACS but the obvious abuse prompted responsible, gutsy politicians to tackle the issue.
During the election this is going to be a non starter since McCain is on it. What are the republicans going to do knock thier best candidate. I suppose they could run Guiliani but man he’s got so much baggage. Anyway there are poeple that got tear gassed, knocked out, kicked , arrested, spied on and jailed this year for trying to express thier opinion. It wasn’t because someone tried to pass some campaign finance reform. It is because this administration has scared the coutry sick and that fear has infected the whole coutry. People are afraid to protest. The new republican slogan should be “Watch what you say” Anyway Forward
http://feingoldforpresident.blogspot.com/
He sure did present himself well during the Alito hearings. Very impressive. The Dem panel should have transfered all their time to Feingold and Schumer. Men among boys (and girl).