Feingold deserves lots of courage points for this. However, he now has a special duty to articulate a clear progressive foreign policy/national defense vision. Because as far as I can tell, even if we pull soldiers from Iraq, we've still got one hell of a problem with international terrorism on our hands.

"Feingold deserves lots of courage points for this."

Courage points?  If you're in the midst of trying to run a nomination campaign from the left, how does this qualify as courage?

The claim that Hillary "has the unusual luxury of being able to worry more about the general election battle than the nomination battle" strikes me as absurd. Hillary's support, such as it is, mostly exists among the chattering classes. The Democratic grassroots consider Hillary a DLC sellout while the Republicans all consider her some kind of socialist lesbian bitch. How on Earth do we expect to get a majority with that? The perfect Democratic candidate would be a liberal with a moderate image. Hillary is exactly the opposite. I don't care how many friends she has in Washington - that won't get her votes in our primaries. Thank God.

No kidding.  I'd call the "PATRIOT ACT" one of the most objectionable pieces in recent history -- completely swung by about 1/3rd of the bill (the rest is fine).

Remember, according to most 2-D models, we liberals are supposed to want highly limited government in the social aspects of life (ie, this) but will allow for more governmental involvement in economic aspects.

When a Democrat acts like a Democrat, we need to pony up and put our money where our mouths are.   

Contribute now, and add .08 dollars to your donation to express your support.

Now, I know the blogosphere has abandoned Russ Feingold now that he's going through a divorce and is no longer electable.

I'm sorry, but it's asinine to think that people too morally righteous to vote for a divorcee would vote for a woman married to a man who's adultery is known throughout the planet.   People so judgmental that they wouldn't vote for a divorced man aren't going to vote for a woman or a Democrat at all, unless we give them the anti-gay, pro-war and pro-business Biden/McCain ticket that in our sick, twisted state of political discourse is a potential Democratic ticket.
    
Then we don't stand for anything and we'll continue to field candidates who offer the nation nothing but nitpicking and nagging of Republican policy.

Even if you're not supporting Russ, or think Hillary is unstopable, this is still a message we need to send to her and the rest of the milquetoast pro-war, anti-civil liberties members of the Senate.  We can start trying to condition our own little Pavlov Democrats.

If you want to stand with Russ, donate now.

Then pass this on.

And end this fucking war.

Petey, there seem to be some rumors going around that your hero, Johnny Sunshine, is likely to jump on this bandwagon tomorrow speaking in Seattle.  Your thoughts on this?

HRC calling for troops out of Iraq?

Would that be a....flip flop?

I don't see how she could go from where she is today on the issue to setting a 2006 timetable.  It's too far a reach.

Others have rated this comment as follows:

ostap     2

ostap -- was it something I said?

Can anyone figure out ostap's politics? I can't...from this, I can only guess he/she hates America Russ Feingold me.

heh.

Why do you want her to get message ? 

She is not going to win Iowa or NH with name id and money.

"The Democratic grassroots consider Hillary a DLC sellout"

Yet another nescient lefty who confuses the grassroots with the chattering "netroots".

"If you want to stand with Russ, donate now.  Then pass this on.  And end this fucking war."

Like standing with Gene McCarthy in '68 ended the fucking war?

Like standing with George McGovern in '72 ended the fucking war?

Like standing with Howard Dean in '04 ended the fucking war?

If you want to end the war, if you want a better foreign policy in the future, try supporting Democrats who can create a national electoral majority.

They are willing to take stands and are not like John "I won't defend myself and

Just to clarify, I wasn't trying to be snarky.

If you wanted people to believe that, perhaps you should have chosen a different moniker.

Hillary's support, such as it is, mostly exists among the chattering classes.

http://www.pollingreport.com/2008.htm

Next, I'm going to read a list of people who may be running in the Democratic primary for president in the next election. After I read all the names, please tell me which of those candidates you would be most likely to support for the Democratic nomination for president in the year 2008:

Hillary Rodham Clinton 40 John Kerry 16 John Edwards 15 Joe Biden 9 Wesley Clark 5 Bill Richardson 3 Evan Bayh 3 Mark Warner 2 None (vol.) 2 All/Any (vol.) 1 Unsure 4

Of course, her support could evaporate before the first primary. But right now, if he chooses to run, she'll be the early front-runner.

I agree Petey, including the part about the country being sick to death of the war.

I worked on this campaign as a teen. It was a disaster:

1972 Presidential election

In the 1972 election, McGovern ran on a platform of:

unilateral withdrawal from the Vietnam War in exchange for the return of American prisoners of war [White p. 122] and amnesty for draft evaders who had left the country [White p. 360]

an across-the-board, 37% reduction in defense spending over three years [White p. 123]

a "demogrant" program giving $1,000 to every citizen in American [White p. 125], later changed to creating a $6,500 guaranteed minimum income for Americans, later dropped [White p. 190]

ratification the Equal Rights Amendment.

This "anti-war" platform had been presaged in 1970 when McGovern sponsored the McGovern-Hatfield amendment, seeking to end U.S. participation in the war by Congressional action. His campaign manager in 1972 was Gary Hart. Between difficulties with his running-mate, Thomas Eagleton (whom he eventually dropped and replaced with Sargent Shriver), and the Republicans' successful campaign to paint him as unacceptably radical, he suffered a 60% - 38% defeat to Richard Nixon -- at the time the second biggest landslide in American history, losing in the Electoral College 520 to 17. McGovern's victories came in Massachusetts and the District of Columbia; McGovern failed to win his home state of South Dakota.

I recall then that reasoning of many sick of war who voted for Nixon, it was sort of the same reasoning as with Bush with the undecided swing voters now that were concerned about the war, still finally deciding on Bush, saying "don't change horses in mindstream" of a war, or "the devil I know is safer that the devil I don't".

Nixon basically promised to get out somehow "with honor." That's what they wanted so they voted for him. People don't react to peacenik attitude or what they see as appeasement or the U.S. looking like it's backing down when we are already in a war; they consider the country's reputation. With Osama et.al. out there talking about the cowardly Western military who loves life more than death, I am sure this is still pretty well operative, if not more so.

I have this instinctive feeling that John McCain understands even though he was, shall we say, incommunicado during much of the homeland Vietnam angst. Going after the Bush administration on the torture thing is hitting where it might really hurt: the damage to the American exceptionalist myth. That's what bothers a majority about Iraq, I think. I feel any Dem withdrawal plans need to keep away from "I told you so" from Deaniacs and Kucinich fans and pacifists for these reasons. That kind of thing can backfire big time.

BTW, it was then that I learned you cannot force culture change through politics. (The E.R.A. et. al.) In a way, expecting Americans to accept such a blatan anti-war platform may have been trying to force a kind of culture change, as well. Nixon was much more like LBJ than this radical McGovern to the vox populi.

It's strange looking up that platform and reading it. Sounds so much like idealistic kidz these days. Nearly makes me lol. Kumbaya, keep dreaming.

P.S. I should clarify on my reference to Dean so the further mischaracterization of him is not enabled. I realize that he is actually hawkish on many things, and also that he's not traditionally liberal on economic issues. I just think many of his supporters ended up "helping" him get characterized that way, as a McGovern type.

What the Vietnam analogs miss, in a fundamental way, is that the Iraq war was never as popular as Vietnam was, and that the Vietnam war remained popular for much longer than popular imagination would indicate.  The alleged motive for Vietnam was not immediately shown to be false; we only knew the domino theory was wrong well after we pulled out.  In Iraq the WMD justification was demonstrated to be wrong almost  right away.  People thought we were fighting for something in Vietnam; that is not true in Iraq today.

 I think the stakes in the 2006 election are high because there is a huge factor in Iraq that has received very little play because of our one-party rule: corruption.  If Democrats can paint republicans as war profiteers as well as people who recklessly led us into a unneeded and unwinnable war - opposing the war will be a very popular thing, not an unpopular one.  I have to admit, I find the disconnect here bizarre - the polls indicate that support for the Iraq war is dropping like a stone, and it would be a disaster for Democrats to side with a large majority?

"for the record, Petey, McCarthy did help end the war. ... Once he spoke up, the die was cast"

We withdrew our troops over 5 years after McCarthy spoke up.  I question the efficacy of that kind of help.

"Without him, who knows what kind of continued madness would have gone on?"

Who knows?  We might have ended up bombing Cambodia for the first time.  We might have ended up carpet bombing North Vietnamese cities for the first time.  Who knows what kind of madness might have broken out without Gene McCarthy.

"Once he spoke up, the die was cast, ultimately leading to LBJ withdrawing and Nixon winning on a "secret plan to end the war."

Once he spoke up, the die was indeed cast.  The dovish candidate received 43% of the vote in 1968 and 39% of the vote in 1972.  Setting aside the Watergate results in 1976, the dovish candidate received 41% of the vote in 1980 and 40% of the vote in 1984.

"PS. Dean didn't run to "stop the war." Surely you know that, Petey?"

Did I write that?  I try to choose my words carefully.  Do me the courtesy of reading them carefully.

"My point, which i thought was fairly clearly written, was that without McCarthy stepping up to provide a political space in which the war could be challenged, 5 years wouldn't have done it."

And if Gene McCarthy hadn't stood up, we'd still be fighting in Vietnam?  C'mon.

Given that Nixon's advisors thought standing in opposition to the anti-war movement was politically advantageous, I'd suggest that the anti-war movement had the effect of lengthening, not shortening the war.

At the end of the day, more Americans died after McCarthy stood up than before.  Many more Southeast Asians died after McCarthy stood up than before.

You seem determinedly and blissfully unaware of the way anti-war activism acts as electoral poison for the left, and I have no hopes of convincing you otherwise.

"Fortunately, in one of his better moments, Clark Clifford convinced him otherwise"

Clark Clifford had many "better moments".  His true greatness was not his actions in '68, but instead his persistent attempts to derail the war in '64 and '65.  At the point when the decisions were actually taken, he played the role of George Ball's protector.

-----

And from the tragedy of counterproductive actions section to the comedy of parsing section:

"As for Howard Dean, here's what you wrote"

Here's what I wrote:

"Like standing with Howard Dean in '04 ended the fucking war?"

And here's how you responded:

"Dean didn't run to "stop the war." Surely you know that, Petey?"

I didn't say that Dean ran to "stop the war".  But I think it's rather undisputed that the great majority of Dean's supporters were indeed motivated to stand with Dean by the single issue of trying to end the war.