A CHEESEHEAD PRESIDENT

Senator Russ Feingold from Wisconsin has been busy positioning himself for the 2008 presidential election. Thanks to the eager Leftist mainstream media, he's been getting a relatively good deal of attention lately.

This morning he appeared on ABC's This Week. George Stephanopoulos actually flew to Madison to tape an interview with Feingold on Saturday. Before a crackling fire, the two talked about Iraq and other issues.

The ambiance was no accident. Rather than sitting in a cold studio, Feingold was steeped in earth tones and warmth and coziness.

Although Feingold is not an unfamiliar face on the national scene, this interview presented the presidential wannabe in a carefully staged setting. Certainly, what Feingold said was important, but maybe not as important as the images. He came off as a likable, approachable nice guy.

Both Steph and Feingold wore suits. Feingold did not opt for his more rustic look or the flannel shirts he typically wears in his Senate campaign commercials, spots that have played a crucial role in propelling him to Washington. Still, the mood was relaxed and intimate. For the national spotlight, Feingold wanted to appear presidential while maintaining a Mr. Rogers persona. He was serious, yet quick to smile. Nice.

It would have been fitting for Steph and Feingold to start singing:

It's a beautiful day in this neighborhood,
A beautiful day for a neighbor.
Would you be mine?
Could you be mine?...

It's a neighborly day in this beauty wood,
A neighborly day for a beauty.
Would you be mine?
Could you be mine?...

I've always wanted to have a neighbor just like you.
I've always wanted to live in a neighborhood with you.

So, let's make the most of this beautiful day.
Since we're together we might as well say:
Would you be mine?
Could you be mine?
Won't you be my neighbor?
Won't you please,
Won't you please?
Please won't you be my neighbor?

Of course, Feingold wasn't inviting the audience to be his neighbor. He was inviting them to support him to be the president.

As usual, he sold himself as an independent thinker, a man of values.

Steph highlighted Feingold's maverick streak by pointing out his willingness to vote his conscience rather than march in lockstep with the Dems.

Feingold was the only senator to vote against the USA Patriot Act in 2001. In addition, he's the only one among the current Dem potential presidential candidates to have voted against the war in Iraq. Solidifying his anti-war stance, back in August, Feingold was the first to advocate a timetable and a specific date for troop withdrawal from Iraq, December 31, 2006.

In the November 21 issue, The New Republic gave Feingold the cover, headlining him as "The Hillary Slayer." A cartoon depicted Feingold as David to Hillary Clinton's Goliath.

Without question, Feingold is setting himself up as an alternative to Hillary.

Will David have what it takes to slay Goliath?

No way.

While Feingold may be the darling of the radical Left, he won't be able to win the support of all those states that went for Bush in 2000 and 2004. I don't think that Feingold can win on one issue, opposition to Iraq. The fact is Feingold is an ultra-liberal.

Steph tried to counter Feingold's alliance with the libs by pointing out that Feingold voted for John Roberts. Although Feingold disappointed NARAL, it really was not a risky move. He has NARAL in his pocket, with a 93 rating.

In response to his vote on Roberts, NARAL Pro-Choice Wisconsin wrote:

Clearly, we’re disappointed. Wisconsinites expected Senators Kohl and Feingold to stand up to this anti-choice nominee. Both have been key allies in the past and have led the Senate in protecting the rights and liberties we all cherish.

NARAL knows that Feingold is rabidly pro-abortion.

On September 26, 1996, during debate on partial birth abortion, Feingold revealed just how extreme his views are.

Transcript

Sen. Santorum: Will the Senator from Wisconsin yield for a question?

Sen. Feingold: I will.

Sen. Santorum: The Senator from Wisconsin says that this decision should be left up to the mother and the doctor, as if there is absolutely no limit that could be placed on what decision that they make with respect to that. And the Senator from California [Sen. Barbara Boxer] is going up to advise you of what my question is going to be, and I will ask it anyway. And my question is this: that if that baby were delivered breech style and everything was delivered except for the head, and for some reason that that baby's head would slip out -- that the baby was completely delivered -- would it then still be up to the doctor and the mother to decide whether to kill that baby?

Sen. Feingold: I would simply answer your question by saying under the Boxer amendment, the standard of saying it has to be a determination, by a doctor, of health of the mother, is a sufficient standard that would apply to that situation. And that would be an adequate standard.

Sen. Santorum: That doesn't answer the question. Let's assume that this procedure is being performed for the reason that you've stated, and the head is accidentally delivered. Would you allow the doctor to kill the baby?

Sen. Feingold: I am not the person to be answering that question. That is a question that should be answered by a doctor, and by the woman who receives advice from the doctor. And neither I, nor is the Senator from Pennsylvania, truly competent to answer those questions. That is why we should not be making those decisions here on the floor of the Senate.

Yikes!

Infanticide won't win a lot of support in Red States.

Feingold's vote for Roberts will not serve to negate his extremism and his liberal voting record. The Americans for Democratic Action give Feingold a 97 rating.

His vote for John Roberts was a safe, calculated move. The Wisconsin NARAL branch didn't abandon him. He didn't lose liberal support because of his vote, but he may have gained some approval from independents.

At this point, everything that Feingold does must be viewed as preparation for a 2008 run.

Most likely, his role will be to push Hillary and others pretending to be centrists to address their true selves and their Leftist positions.

Feingold may be an appealing nice guy, but he'd be doomed to defeat if he became the Dem 2008 nominee. He’s just too liberal.

I don’t think he has a future as a vice presidential nominee either. I certainly can't see Hillary picking him as her running mate.

Although Feingold eventually voted with his party on Bill Clinton's impeachment, he did break ranks to vote to keep the proceedings alive.

Feingold's Statement

(Excerpts)

The question before us today is: Should the President of the United States be held to a lower standard?

The answer is: No. To the contrary; we can bestow no higher honor than to select one individual to represent us all as President. In one person we endow the character of our nation, as the head of state and the head of government.

It's with great disappointment, but firm resolve, that I have concluded the President has not lived up to this high standard and that he should be removed from office. The House managers have demonstrated beyond reasonable doubt that, in addition to indefensible behavior with an intern, which was not illegal, the President engaged in the obstruction of justice and, as an element of that obstruction, committed perjury before a federal grand jury, which is.

...The President had it solely within his power to keep the country from the course on which it has been for the past year. First, of course, he could have chosen not to engage in the behavior in question. Having behaved as he did, though, and having been discovered, the President could have acknowledged his own actions and accepted the consequences. This could have been an honorable resignation, or an admission, contrition, and a firm resolve to take responsibility; with a request for resolution in a manner short of impeachment and trial.

Instead, the President chose to deny the allegations, and fight them with a coordinated scheme of manipulation and obstruction. He lied outright to the American people, to his close associates, and to his cabinet. An enduring image of this whole tale will be his finger-pointing lie to the American people, even after admonishing us to listen closely, because he didn't want to have to say it again.

Even in view of these actions, the President missed numerous opportunities to right this matter and get it behind him and the country. At virtually every opportunity, though, he chose an action that further prolonged the matter and led directly to his impeachment.

...As a result of these choices by the President of the United States, the Senate was left with no choice other than to confront the charges and hear the case pursuant to the President's impeachment in the House of Representatives.

Obviously, Feingold didn't consider the impeachment a "vast right-wing conspiracy." Given this history, I doubt Hillary would want Feingold to be her running mate in 2008.

When it comes to presidential politics, Hillary is not divorced from Bill. In the 2008 presidential election, his past is hers. A Clinton-Feingold ticket would be too uncomfortable for the Dems and offer too many opportunities for the Republicans to bring up the impeachment and show Hillary as Bill’s enabler.

As likable and principled as Feingold might be to some, he won't make it through the primaries. I think he'll do no more than stir things up a bit and put pressure on his fellow Dem candidates. In short, he'll be an obstacle as they try to present themselves as being in line with mainstream America.

He's getting attention now because of his anti-Iraq war stance, not because he is a viable candidate.

At the end of his interview with Stephanopolous, Feingold said, "But I do think one thing we can all agree on is that this country is overdue for a cheesehead president. We've never had one."

That's cute. He's showing his Mr. Rogers side. However, his friendliness and his Midwestern charm won't be enough to camouflage his extremist liberal views.

Feingold can't win.

He's the Howard Dean of 2008.