Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

FEINGOLD Should Be Our Nominee... He Wowed Me Just Now...

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
ChiciB1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-30-07 04:59 PM
Original message
FEINGOLD Should Be Our Nominee... He Wowed Me Just Now...
I KNOW it won't happen, but he really talks for me.

I know some are more moderate, but I sure like his style! Kinda reminds of Paul Wellstone to some extent..

But there was ONLY ONE Paul Wellstone!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
snowbear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-30-07 05:03 PM
Response to Original message
1. He completely disagrees with Senator Clinton!

He did a great job on Wolf Blitzer's program. Way to go Feingold!!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flpoljunkie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-30-07 05:05 PM
Response to Original message
2. Feingold: "Those who voted for the Iraq war were wrong then and they're wrong now!
Feingold on the "timid Democrats" who will not vote for his resolution that will redeploy our troops out of Iraq in six months and cut the funding for troops remaining in Iraq.

Transcript will be up sometime later.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Leilani Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-30-07 05:10 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. And also
you have to question their judgement (those running for Prez) in that they voted for this war.

Russ is correct.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KenHodson Donating Member (220 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-30-07 05:21 PM
Response to Reply #2
11. They were wrong!
No votes for warmongers! 296 members in the House, and 77 in the Senate voted for this lie of a war.
To those who voted yea, either there exists a hidden agenda or they simply aren't smart enough for the job.
The list of viable candidates for 2008 is short.

Feingold sits well with me, as does Obama, Gore and Giuliani.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flpoljunkie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-30-07 05:26 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. No, Giuliani! Read this from The Nation on Rudy: Cashing in on Catastrophe
Edited on Tue Jan-30-07 05:28 PM by flpoljunkie
Cashing In on Catastrophe

by WAYNE BARRETT & DAN COLLINS

from the September 25, 2006 issue

Even before he left office as New York City's mayor at the end of 2001, Rudolph Giuliani was telling reporters about Giuliani Partners, the management consulting firm he intended to open up with his old City Hall team. The partners were more of a Giuliani posse than a group of peers. Michael Hess, the former city corporation counsel, was named managing partner. Fire Commissioner Tom Von Essen became a senior partner, as did Police Commissioner Bernard Kerik, whose later nomination as head of Homeland Security would go down in flames after revelations that his concern for following the rules and avoiding ethical conflicts appeared close to nonexistent. The only partner who came from outside the City Hall crowd was Roy Bailey, former finance chair of the Republican Party of Texas, who'd gotten to know Giuliani when he helped raise money for Giuliani's abortive 2000 Senate campaign against Hillary Clinton. Bailey helped finance the new company, whose reported start-up payroll was $10 million a year.

The most valuable commodity the new company had to sell was not management expertise but the aura of America's Mayor--the man whose cool-headed 9/11 leadership had taken on mythic proportions. While Giuliani's first term as mayor brought him renown as a crime fighter who made New York livable again, his second term was a slowly escalating disaster before 9/11. The city, which admired his feisty stubbornness when the enemies were drug dealers and cop killers, had grown tired of a seemingly endless series of political catfights with school chancellors, black neighborhoods, museums, rival politicians and even hot-dog vendors. And, as would become clear later, Giuliani had allowed the city to meet the disaster unprepared in myriad ways, ignoring the well-noted lessons of the first attack on the towers, which occurred less than a year before he became mayor.

Now, with Giuliani traveling the country as a 2008 Republican presidential hopeful, his record both as mayor and afterward is coming under increasing scrutiny. In no area is there more to examine than in the story of Giuliani Partners.

Giuliani Partners' initial press releases religiously avoided any mention of the attacks--Rudy is described as the man who "returned accountability to city government and improved the quality of life for all New Yorkers." But when their clients, who were very frequently companies in trouble, told the world they had just hired a renowned team of "crisis managers," no one pretended their critical expertise came from handling snowstorms or subway fires.

Before long, Giuliani Partners was all over the map, consulting on security for nuclear power plants one day, on efficient bulk purchasing for New York-area hospitals another. It signed on to help the troubled, scandal-plagued WorldCom establish a "model form of corporate governance" and to help Delta Airlines with its bankruptcy. It agreed to review the National Thoroughbred Racing Association's electronic betting systems after a race-fixing scandal. It formed a series of investment alliances that purchased interests in everything from a Tokyo wind-power company to a California firm, CamelBak, which made backpacks with sipping tubes for people like long-distance bikers and soldiers in desert postings. (Kerik was enthusiastic; it was "a perfect mechanism to stay hydrated," he told the Daily News, envisioning every New York City firefighter equipped with a CamelBak as a matter of course. "If I was a fireman I'd want one.")

The Partners also rekindled relationships with some old friends who played central roles in some of the biggest city failures on 9/11. Among them was a "strategic partnership" with CB Richard Ellis, the successor of the firm that had found the city the perfect location for a command center--high above lower Manhattan in one of the World Trade Center towers. The announcement of the deal, in which Giuliani Partners would be advising Ellis on "location and site assessment" as well as on emergency preparedness and fire safety, was made without any discernible sense of irony.

Cashing in on 9/11 took many forms. In 2004 Giuliani Partners signed up Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, which was concerned about the popularity of drug re-importation. American pharmaceutical companies sold their product at much lower prices in Canada and Europe, where national price controls were in effect. The big profits came in the United States, where Congress had vigilantly guarded the drug manufacturers' right to charge what the market would bear. But American senior citizens had begun taking bus trips to Canada to buy their medication, and, in a far more ominous development for the drug companies, members of Congress were talking about making it legal to import cheaper prescription drugs from across the border. PhRMA wanted Giuliani Partners to prepare a report on the safety of these practices.

The report found re-importation to be a bad and dangerous thing. "As the nation tightens its borders against possible future terrorist attacks, it risks undermining security and safety by opening them to non-FDA approved prescription drugs," the Giuliani study concluded. Giuliani himself testified before two Senate committees. When the public was invited to take its turn to testify before a federal task force studying drug importation, one of the first speakers was Kerik, who raised the possibility that terrorists could send weapons of biological warfare across the border disguised as prescription drugs.

more...

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060925/barrett
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KenHodson Donating Member (220 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-30-07 05:43 PM
Response to Reply #12
13. I read it, but I am a one-issue voter this time 'round
And come on, that article rips on Camelback for being Camelback and CB Richard Ellis for being CB Richard Ellis.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flpoljunkie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-30-07 05:59 PM
Response to Reply #13
15. If that one issue is Iraq, doesn't Giuliani support Bush on Iraq?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
erpowers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-30-07 06:54 PM
Response to Reply #11
20. Why Giuliani?
As far as I know Giuliani supported the war in Iraq from the start. In addition, a few days ago Giuliani said he supported Bush's idea for a surge and that he supported keeping the soldiers in Iraq for as long as the war last. In addition, from what I have heard if not for Giuliani things on 9/11 might have been better. I have heard that many people begged Giuliani to fix the communication devices of the police and fire department. Also, I heard that the main reason so many police and fire fighters died in the towers is that their communication devices did not work properly. So why Giuliani?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flpoljunkie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-30-07 05:11 PM
Response to Original message
4. Fact Sheet on Feingold Proposal To End Our Military Involvement in Iraq, Safely Redeploy Our Troops
Edited on Tue Jan-30-07 05:20 PM by flpoljunkie
FACT SHEET: FEINGOLD PROPOSAL TO END OUR MILITARY INVOLVEMENT IN IRAQ AND SAFELY REDEPLOY OUR TROOPS

U.S. Senator Russ Feingold will soon propose legislation to force the President to safely redeploy U.S. troops out of Iraq within six months of enactment.

Feingold’s legislation will:

Prohibit the use of funds for the continued deployment of U.S. Armed Forces to the Republic of Iraq after six months of enactment.

Require the Administration to report to Congress a strategy for safely redeploying U.S. forces from Iraq within the six months prior to the fund termination date.


Allow for specific exceptions to the prohibition including to:

Conduct targeted counter-terrorism operations in Iraq.

Allow a limited number of U.S. forces to conduct specific training for Iraqi security services.

Provide security for U.S. infrastructure and civilian personnel.

Feingold’s legislation will not:

Prohibit or restrict funds for the safe and orderly withdrawal of the Armed Forces personnel from Iraq.

Prohibit or restrict funds for the troops remaining in Iraq for purposes listed above.

Prohibit funds for any department or agency of the Government of the United States to carry out political, economic, or general reconstruction activities in Iraq.

On numerous occasions, Congress has exercised its constitutional authority to limit the President’s ability to escalate existing military engagements. Here are just a few examples:

Cambodia – In late December 1970, Congress passes the Supplemental Foreign Assistance Appropriations Act prohibiting the use of funds to finance the introduction of United States ground combat troops into Cambodia or to provide U.S. advisors to or for Cambodian military forces in Cambodia.

Vietnam – In late June 1973, Congress passes the second Supplemental Appropriations Act for FY1973. This legislation contains language cutting off funds for combat activities in Vietnam after August 15, 1973.

Somalia – In November 1993, the Department of Defense Appropriations Act includes a provision that prohibits funding after March 31, 1994 for military operations in Somalia, except for a limited number of military personnel to protect American diplomatic personnel and American citizens, unless further authorized by Congress.

Bosnia – In 1998, Congress passes the Defense Authorization Bill, with a provision that prohibits funding for Bosnia after June 30, 1998, unless the President makes certain assurances.

http://www.feingold.senate.gov/issues_redeploy_factsheet.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dflprincess Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-30-07 05:12 PM
Response to Original message
5. I adored Wellstone but,
Feingold voted against the Patriot Act, Wellstone voted for it (I couldn't believe it at the time - I'm sure he would have recanted had he lived long enough). Sometimes Feingold has out-Wellstoned Wellstone.

And I don't care what Stephanie Millers says, Russ in MY future husband.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hippiechick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-30-07 05:19 PM
Response to Reply #5
10. I'll arm wrestle ya' for him !
:loveya: Russ. Sigh. :loveya:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jilln Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-30-07 05:12 PM
Response to Original message
6. Always remember he was the ONLY one to vote against the Patriot Act.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NoSheep Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-30-07 06:40 PM
Response to Reply #6
17. Feingold?
Thanks..I'm confused.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NoSheep Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-30-07 06:42 PM
Response to Reply #17
19. Just got my answer.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Just-plain-Kathy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-30-07 05:13 PM
Response to Original message
7. Feingold/Webb...the ‘truth and strength’ ticket...
One could only wish.

(...and dare I say, I wish Gore would step up to the plate to help uncover the Bush White house on the issue of Iraq...he's been great on the subject of global warming)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Renew Deal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-30-07 05:14 PM
Response to Original message
8. I agree. I can't believe he's not running.
He was one of my favorites. It's so depressing that my top 2 didn't run.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hippiechick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-30-07 05:18 PM
Response to Original message
9. Gore/Feingold
.. that way Russ has 8 years to develop under President Gore's tutelage, and can be our nominee and next President in 2016.

:bounce: :woohoo: :loveya:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bjorn Against Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-30-07 06:41 PM
Response to Reply #9
18. He would be a great VP pick
There are very few people in Washington with the ethics and integrity of Feingold, he deserves far more recognition than he gets. I would love to see him in the VP slot.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ChiciB1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-30-07 07:00 PM
Response to Reply #9
23. EEEWWW.. Do You Think They Could Work Well Together???
I SINCERELY respect and find BOTH men could lead such a strong coalition, they seem to be polar opposites in many ways. That COULD be explosive and WONDERFUL, but will the public buy it??

I can't believe we are so entrenched in '08 already, so much could change. Gore may yet decide to run, but ya think he would pick Feingold??

Would make me very happy... but I wonder.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hippiechick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-30-07 07:47 PM
Response to Reply #23
24. Lookit Gore and Clinton in 91/92 ...
... they were sorta not-very-much-alike and some people were quite surprised at the pairing, and it turned out to be an amazing Administration. :)

And, if I had to pick anyone to be that 'one heartbeat away' ... it would be Russ.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
More Than A Feeling Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-30-07 05:46 PM
Response to Original message
14. If Feingold reconsidered his decision, I would flock to his banner in a hearbeat.
Among politicans, he's the one I trust the most to do the right thing, because he's shown that he has that ability.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bjorn Against Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-30-07 06:38 PM
Response to Original message
16. Feingold would make a great President
I was disappointed when he decided not to run. The unfortunate thing is that the way the system is set up now he would have a very difficult time raising money because he is a very ethical person who is not afraid to turn down a big donation from the ultra wealthy. It is so sad that the current system punishes those who have ethics, but unfortunately it does and that is the reason we will not see a President Feingold until there are some serious changes to campaign finance laws.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
harveyc Donating Member (333 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-30-07 06:56 PM
Response to Original message
21. Russ is awesome! He knows how to end the Iraqi War. ... n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AzDar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-30-07 06:59 PM
Response to Original message
22. Saw him on CNN..he was awesome. I'll take 50 of those, please.
:loveya:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Meshuga Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-30-07 07:49 PM
Response to Original message
25. I'd love to see him run
But sadly he won't run this time. Hopefully he will be picked for VP by the nominee!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Jan 14th 2025, 02:07 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC