The Instinct For Blood?

By Michael Reynolds | Related entries in General Politics

Every mainstream pundit in the country, and both political parties, think Russ Feingold’s censure motion is a bad idea and will hurt Democrats. They’re wrong. Here’s why.


This entry was posted on Tuesday, March 14th, 2006 and is filed under General Politics. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

5 Responses to “The Instinct For Blood?”

  1. Bob Aman Says:

    Fine, no doubt the blood is in the water. But what happens when the most recent thing the American people remember about Feingold, come presidential election time, is that he’s the guy that failed to drive the knife in properly?

  2. Tom Strong Says:

    Feingold’s got nothing to lose. His chances of winning the election are one in a thousand anyway – and he knows it. Plus, he has a history of acting on principle. In this case, I think his principle is right, politically and morally.

  3. Ryan Says:

    “Plus, he has a history of acting on principle.”

    This is the key. As a constituent of Feingold’s since before I was old enough to vote, I’ve been following him since I became interested in politics. Everything I have seen from him suggests that his actions are, almost without exception, based on what he believes is in the best interest of his constituents and his country. I know it seems impossible to believe in today’s political climate but I honestly believe that he honestly is more concerned with doing what he feels is right than doing what is politically expedient.

    I don’t always agree with him, though I do more often than not, but I always appreciate his sincerity and willingness to go against the grain when he feels it is the right thing to do.

  4. Jeremy Says:

    Yeah, Feingold didn’t vote to stop Clinton’s impeachment, did he? He eventually voted not to impeach, but he didn’t do the partisan vote against the whole process. He strikes me as a man of principle over politics.

  5. Seb Says:

    Errrr…was there an argument in there that I missed, or is Mr. Reynolds having a Pauline Kael moment? I mean, I’m as much in favor of a good rant as the next guy, lord knows, but when someone says “Here’s why” I usually expect an argument: that’s not an argument (yes it is).

Leave a Reply


NOTE TO COMMENTERS:


You must ALWAYS fill in the two word CAPTCHA below to submit a comment. And if this is your first time commenting on Donklephant, it will be held in a moderation queue for approval. Please don't resubmit the same comment a couple times. We'll get around to moderating it soon enough.


Also, sometimes even if you've commented before, it may still get placed in a moderation queue and/or sent to the spam folder. If it's just in moderation queue, it'll be published, but it may be deleted if it lands in the spam folder. My apologies if this happens but there are some keywords that push it into the spam folder.


One last note, we will not tolerate comments that disparage people based on age, sex, handicap, race, color, sexual orientation, national origin or ancestry. We reserve the right to delete these comments and ban the people who make them from ever commenting here again.


Thanks for understanding and have a pleasurable commenting experience.


Related Posts: