Posted on 12/02/2005 7:16:18 AM PST by Jean S
Few politicians have enjoyed the free ride that the local media have given to Russ Feingold. He is seldom challenged or hit with hard questions and his position on the war is no exception. What, for example, is his plan? What does he believe will happen if we leave Iraq permanently? Does he believe that Iraqis will be better off now that Saddam Hussein is gone, or not?
Now that he's running for president, Feingold's exemption from scrutiny is coming rapidly to an end.
And here is a good example from the Truth Laid Bear:
Here's an appalling little exchange I heard on NPR this morning, where Senator Russ Feingold, everybody's favorite defender of free speech, exercises his own to question the legitimacy of the elected Iraqi government.
Feingold was thrillled to point out that Iraqi leaders meeting in Egypt at an Arab League summit called for a timetable for U.S. forces to withdraw from Iraq. Steve Inskeep of NPR, to his credit, pointed out that the position of the elected government of Iraq differs from that expressed at the summit, but Feingold would have none of it (RealAudio):
Inskeep: "We heard earlier this hour from the national security advisor in Iraq, who said Iraqi politicians said [that they wanted a timetable for withdrawal] but the government of Iraq essentially agrees with the Bush administration."
Feingold: That's right: the government of Iraq that was produced basically as a result of an American occupation as opposed to a general consensus from the country is not the test. The test is what the major interests in the country said. The major interests in the country, the political parties, hey, these are the people that are going to decide the future of the country. If you got the Sunnis, the Shiites, and the Kurds all agreeing that we need a timetable, who do you listen do? Do you listen to them, or do you listen to these folks that have a very shaky government that frankly was a result --- of course, of an election --- but also of an American invasion of the country... that is a very bad way to ignore the wishes of the Iraqi people."
Absolutely charming.
Another way of describing, as Feingold put it in disapproving tones, "a very shaky government that frankly was a result... of an American invasion of the country," would be "One of the first democratic governments in the history of the Middle East which over two thousand American soldiers have given their lives to establish, and which many more stand in harm's way every day to protect."
I think my formulation is more appropriate, and I'd like to wager Senator Feingold that the vast majority of the American soldiers he protests so much to support with demands for a withdrawal timetable would agree with me.
I'd also appreciate if someone on Senator Feingold's staff could explain to me the following:
a) If the good Senator truly means what he implies: that he does not accept the legitimacy of the elected Iraqi government.
b) Whether he believes that the foreign policy of the United States will be aided, or hindered, by casting such aspersions on the Iraqi government and de facto agreeing with the terrorists who, not incidentally, are also quite interested in undermining the credibility and legitimacy of the government in the eyes of Iraqis and the world.
Interesting questions. We'll see if Feingold ever responds.
**
From the comments:
"It has been abundantly clear for nearly two years and counting that the Democrats actively oppose the U.S. effort in Iraq and have spend that time looking for rationales as to why we need to cut and run. So I'm not at all surprised Feingold’s essential point is to bug out of Iraq, victory be damned. However, I am stunned he proclaims the illegitimacy of "the government of Iraq that was produced basically as a result of an American occupation as opposed to a general consensus from the country is not the test," and completely disavows the democratic elections. Shocking, isn’t it, for U.S. troops to provide security on election day? I wonder what Feingold thinks of Eisenhower sending troops to Alabama to integrate the University of Alabama? I can hardly wait for Feingold to condemn that unilateral display of U.S. military force. Anyway, irrespective of his amazingly irresponsible and intellectually dishonest promotion of an Arab League-sponsored confab as more legitimate than the elected government, it’s fair to conclude Democrats hate Bush and the U.S. so much they'd disclaim democratic elections in other countries if it serves their self-perceived political interests.
But we dare not question their patriotism.
Posted by: Tim on December 1, 2005 07:51 AM
"Well, then isn't Feingold's position on the legitimacy of the Iraqi government pretty much identical to Zarqawi's and al-Qaeda's?
But I'm not questioning his patriotism, of course. Just expressing amazement that some constituency actually elected him to represent them in the US Senate."
"Following on Tim's point, what does Feingold think of governments the U.S. has stood up in Japan, Germany, South Korea, Afghanistan, and assisted setting up throughout Western Europe?
All suspect, I suppose.
Do these guys ever think about how they sound to the rest of us?"
http://www.truthlaidbear.com/archives/2005/11/30/feingold_pay_no_attention_to_that_elected_government_in_the_corner.php#001933...
They have LOST consistently since 1994, so why not CUT & RUN? Put your money where your mouth is...STEP DOWN NOW, DUMOCRATS!
IMHO, we need to encourage Feingold...he's the hard left anchor of the Moonbat wing of the Dem party, and the more he pulls them left, off the cliff, the better it is..
---ditto--the only "accomplishment" of that arshloch is his joining McCain in starting the destruction of the First Amendment--
FYI
This son of a bitch should BURN IN HELL along with McCain for his assault on the first amendment.
I have a different take on the 'patriotism' of many politicians. The question is not so much whether they are loyal to the country .... the question is where on their priority list patriotism lies. Most people I know would rank their patriotism third behind God and family. People like Feingold, Kerry, Biden, etc. seem to place patriotism no higher than fifth behind God, family, personal political power, and political party loyalty. And in some cases I believe the order of the first four is reversed, if indeed God and family even appear on the list. So, I don't question their 'patriotism', but I do question where it ranks on their priority list ... that is to say, I question their character.
On a Wisconsin Public Radio interview, Feingold claimed that the indictment of Tom Delay proved the success of his McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform. Sadly for old Russ, Delay is indicted for violating a Texas law that became effective after the purported violation.
During his 2004 re-election campaign, he ran TV ads showing what a good family man he was. Two weeks after the election he and his second wife got divorced.
When the McCain-Feingold "campaign finance reform" hits full force, it will infringe on the people's right to free political speech 60 days before the election.
I hope this will wake people up and insure that there is no way either McCain or Feingold will be elected to anything greater than dogcatcher.
You might fits funny, but its starting to look like Hillarys "centrist" strategy may blow up.
Some of the dems looking to run in 2008 have ripped off her ideas, Feingold may be the only one openly running to Hillarys left in the primary.
Which makes him the Howard Dean in 2008, which screws everybody else over.
FWIT, with the leftwing websites, they all prefer him over Hillary, for some bizarre reason, they think he is going to get the nomination.
Well, isn't he one obnoxious jerk.
Hi, JeansS! I-love-Charlie's-show BUMP! I can't wait for him to really go to town on this topic.
About the "Bear" blog, though -- although I admire their hunt for pork -- I wonder why the ad for George cLooney's latest fantasy film? It does have a "conservation" message on the link, but when it's someone at his level I think of streisand's multiple chimneys and her admonitions to us little people to hang our clothes on the line rather than use the dryer. Kind of condescending!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.