Tweet
Former Wisconsin Senator Russ Feingold
Today former Wisconsin Democratic Senator Russ Feingold, who lost his seat in 2010 to Ron Johnson, told supporters he will not run for office in 2012. From Russ Feingold’s announcement:
I am grateful for the friendship and support of so many fellow Wisconsinites who suggested I consider running for statewide office in the coming months. While I may seek elective office again someday, I have decided not to run for public office during 2012.
This was a difficult decision, as I thoroughly enjoyed my tenure in both the State Senate and the U.S. Senate, and I know that progressives are eager to reverse some of the outrageous policies being pursued by corporate interests at both the state and federal levels. I am also well aware that I have a very strong standing in the polls should I choose to run again for the U.S. Senate or in a recall election for governor. After twenty-eight continuous years as an elected official, however, I have found the past eight months to be an opportunity to look at things from a different perspective.
Feingold’s decision not to run in 2012 is a real setback for Wisconsin Democrats. Despite losing in 2010, Feingold still has a net positive favorability rating among his state’s voters. Public Policy Polling (PPP) found that Feingold polled the best of the potential Senate candidates and that Feingold was the only candidate with a strong lead over Governor Scott Walker in a possible recall.
This decision could be good news for Gov. Walker. Without a strong challenger like Feingold willing to run in a recall election, it could cause forces opposed to Walker to decide it may not be worth going through the difficult and expensive task for running a recall effort.
87 Comments
Jon, I note that you do not include, in the body of your post, the information that Feingold has decided that re-electing Barack Obama is his, Feingold’s, job number one.
Causing me to ask everyone here at FDL: Is there any putative Dim politician, “in” office or “out”, who will not support Osterity’s re-election bid?
If Elizabeth Warren succeeds in her effort to become a Senator from Massachusetts, will she, also, climb on O’s band-wagon?
These questions and their answers will determine the future of the Dim Party and make clear whether there are ANY Dims who can be trusted to notice and respond to the truth facing this nation and ALL of its citizens (and would-be citizens, as well, for that matter).
DW
Feingold is running for vice president.
Biden his time, is he, micki?
DW
Interesting,,,,all I know is that if Obama wins the next election, we are all doomed. Someone has got to jump in here.
I have supported Russ Feingold for several years and am mystified by his recent actions.
To say that I am disappointed would be an understatement.
Thanks for the heads-up, Jon. Very dissapointing and somewhat enlightening as well. Just wondering how Russ could think getting the President reelected is a worthy cause. More worthy a cause than remaining a champion of liberal ideas?
Another one bites the dust.
Seriously?!?!?
That tears it, what little respect I had for Feingold has evaporated to nothing at all.
Sure, it’s easy to take “principled” stands in the Senate, where it makes no difference when it is 1 out of 100. Losing over and over and over again is completely and utterly useless.
Feingold had an opportunity to run for Governnor and actually make a difference for once in his life, and he bails to support the President with the worst record of civil liberties abuses in the history of the country?!?!? This is the poster child for civil libertarians in this country???
Feingold, you fucking weasel. I hope you make your political retirement permanent.
Is Feingold the last progressive left in Minnesota? Progressives in this country have really fallen on such a hard time?
Given the national party is supporting her candidacy, what do you think?
Her Coakley moment will be coming any time now…
Had Warren chosen to challenge Billion Dollar O in a primary, I would have enthusiastically supported her, because it would have shown some inclination in the Democratic Party to fight back against the neoliberals. As a Senator though, I imagine she’ll start singing from the same hymnal as the rest of them. I am so sick of the Democratic Party.
Check paragraph number six, phred, in “A Message from Russ” at Jon’s link to “Russ Feingold’s announcement”.
DW
Yes. Warren is not the woman we thought and hoped she might be, obviously, phred.
I am through with peoople who say, “Well, they would like to change things, but they must be practical …”
Right!
Done.
Finished.
Period.
DW
Lloyd Doggett bit the dust for me too when he just voted for the SuperCommittee. I’ve worked for and supported him forever. This time he’s got a big issue getting reelected due to Republican redistricting. I was gearing up to work for him again, but saw that vote and sent him a note saying I’m appalled and he can count me out for support. I got a response that does nothing to make me change my mind. I’m sick about it.
Who will come to our aid when we finally take to the streets demanding government be run for Main Street? Assad? Cameron? I don’t think so.
Be prepared for something spectacular next year.
We live in the new age of electronic social media where 65% of the public make their decisions after going on-line. We are NOT dependent upon political parties, TV, Radio or Print for the selection of our President.
Obama and his liar’s crew think they have us cornered into voting for him. They under-estimate the power of on-line organizing. This is just a first volly.
Remember Ross Perot? The world is much much more advanced thanks to social media sites. We can’t and won’t go back to allowing $$$ select our candidates.
Prepare yourself for the evolution of Democracy.
Agreed, I was looking forward to a run for Governor. This was not the news with which I wanted to wake up to this morning. Particularly the news that he’s getting behind President Obamas’s re-election. Obama is diametrically opposed to everything Progressives United stands for.
Wisconsin
I guess that Finegold is in Kucinich’s corner. When it really counts and your vote will actually make a difference, just go along with the ptb. I thought that Finegold was actually progressive. Now I see that it was a pose like all the other ‘progressives’ in office. He really could make a difference as governor, but he doesn’t want to govern any more than any of the other phonies. I guess that I will no long be able to capitalize his name or Kucinich’s name.
I wouldn’t trust the voting in Wisconsin….If Feingold were to lose to Walker, his chances of higher office in the future would be damaged. JMHO
Same so-called progressive song and dance–when it comes time to put up, they back down.
Heh. Rahm didn’t work so hard to purge the Ds for nuttin’ ya know. Betcha he scared the bejeezuz out of every single one of them. Mostly on donations, but also on whatever other info he could get on them. His files might rival J. Edgar’s.
I just did. Grrrr…. Fucking weasel.
Other than that, having a love Friday, how ’bout you? ; )
Isn’t it pretty clear by now that the people don’t choose….
Wisconsin.
“Done. Finished. Period.”
Yep. Right on, DW. I’m so done.
Me three.
I share your pain. Nice to see your fonts by the way.
I’m not surprised by feingold. I was a supporter of feingold but no more. All politicians are alike – republican and democrat, they all have their own agenda and it has nothing to do with the people of this country. I’m done with the democratic party and I never supported the republican party.
I was always for the greater good and still am in my heart, but I’m not going to participate in anything involving politics and that includes voting. I also cared about future generations (including my children), but now I say, “let them fend for themselves.”
The last thing I have to say is obama has absolutely ruined the democratic party. I thought bush was bad, to say the very least, but obama is an abomination.
Surely among the crowds in Wisconsin there are several fabulous, yet undiscovered candidates who could stomp Walker.
Feingold — like every other Democrat who has held federal office over the last decade — failed progressives and *should* take some time to reassess his priorities before he even thinking about another run.
With overtly vindictive partisan hacks like my WI State Senator (R) Frank Lasee introducing legislation in WI to levy fines of up to $500 a day on any State Senators not in attendance without proper cause when the state senate is in session, (to prevent a repeat of the Democratic 14 last winter heading to Illinois) it is really not a surprise that anyone would (edit) NOT want to jump into any public office at this point.
Phred, DW, maybe it’s not so bad. What he said was
Is he saying that he’s not running and therefore would be available, ie, for gov if there should be a recall? If so, there should be scuttlebutt in WI. Who would know?
Russ Feingold won’t be in politics, he will be teaching
“Teaching law during the spring semester at Marquette University Law School was a joy. The Marquette Law School is a thriving academic institution situated in a beautiful new building, Eckstein Hall. I found my time with the dean, staff, faculty, and especially the students at Marquette to be a terrific first experience in teaching law. I am pleased that I have been asked to return to teach full-time this fall and look forward to doing so.”
and writing a book
“Another different experience for me has been writing a book to be published by Crown Publishing/Random House next February. I am working hard to finish it. It’s about how we have too often lost our way as a nation in responding to the 9/11 attacks and related issues. Entitled “While America Sleeps,” writing it has given me a chance to put down in a sustained way some of my concerns at a time when too many political operatives in the nation try to shift the political discourse away from the fundamental national security and international issues that will determine our futures and those of our children and grandchildren. I intend to make appearances in 2012 in Wisconsin and around the country to discuss this topic.”
and he doesn’t have time to serve the country.
“I am also well aware that I have a very strong standing in the polls should I choose to run again for the U.S. Senate or in a recall election for governor. After twenty-eight continuous years as an elected official, however, I have found the past eight months to be an opportunity to look at things from a different perspective.”
So “while America sleeps” Feingold is awake, teaching and writing.
Does “electronic social media” control the voting machines and counter the election rigging?
Will billionaire donors be dissuaded by “electronic social media”?
As long as a candidate is a D or R, that candidate was chosen by the almighty dollar.
The people behind the scenes don’t believe in political evolution, what they want is stasis or outright regression to neo-feudalism.
I really want to believe what you wrote. My skepticism won’t let me.
It’s depressing. Feingold is the only pol i’ve ever donated money too, and now it looks like he’s joined the long list of “Stepford Dems”. What the hell is going on?
conspiracy theory time:
I think the Surveillance State just has grade A dirt on every single pol in Washington. How else do you explain Al Franken’s 180 on the patriot act? Or the Kucinich plane incident followed by his inexplicable healthcare vote? They all just “changed their minds” with no explanation? wtf?
And look what happened to Eric Massa right after he voted against that healthcare bill. They’re probably all secretly pedophiles or something and being blackmailed.
He should go to work for Elizabeth Warren.
If those who seek public office are concerned ONLY with themselves and THEIR future, then perhaps that “logic” is “pragmatic”, however, as a real and genuine act of democractic intent, of desiring to “serve” and help the cause of humanity, lsls, such “pragmatic” behavior leaves me cold and disgusted.
Did you, perhaps, read paragraph six, in Jon’s link to Russ Feingold’s announcment?
THAT is true pragmatism, in the most depressing sense which I can possibly imagine.
If this is Feingold’s sense of “progressive” behavior, then he clearly intends to give it such a foul taste in the minds of the public as to destroy any semblance of what “liberal” or “progressive” once meant.
DW
I lived in Wisconsin for more than 30 years. Feingold would not have been our strongest candidate. For one thing, he’s a pussy. But beyond that, he’s a weak politician who barely got reelected in 1998, and lost big in 2010.
What Walker has done has shocked many people. They thought they were electing a Main Street Republican, and he turned the state into a war zone. What Democrats need against Walker is someone who can come across as a unifier, and Russ, for all his pusillanimity, could never do that. We’re not going to beat Walker with a strong partisan Democrat, and we shouldn’t try. Somebody like Herb Kohl would be the perfect candidate, to serve out Walker’s term and then give way to a strong Democrat in 2014.
Well said. I’m depressed about all of this….:(
Every. Single. Democrat? I don’t know, but we certainly are not well represented.
It may have to do with the same reason he nixed his past thoughts about running. Remember he was our darling until Harry Reid and Chuck Schumer cut him off to support Hillary.
No progressive can ever trust the DSCC or the DCCC, both of whom push pro-war and pro-Wall Street candidates.
I think your emphasis in that paragraph is entirely misplaced. In my opinion, the most depressingly significant sentences are these (my bold):
To think that Feingold is leaving the door open to run for Gov next year is nonsensical, since this statement is to make it clear that he will NOT run next year.
But he will be working to re-elect a President who claims the authority to hold American citizens indefinitely or heck just assassinate them if he feels like it! How cool for Mr. Civil Liberties to put his effort into such an awesome cause as that! /s
Why we want to send good people into the lion’s den of elected office, hoping that just one more idealistic and true person will make a difference, I really have to wonder why we would wish that on anyone.
Then when they want to live a more personally meaningful life instead of sacrifice yet more for a greater good that isn’t going to materialize in the near future, I wonder why we would sacrifice them that way. Sacrifice wasn’t good enough, if they won’t go to the volcano willingly, we’ll be willing to demonize or at least scorn them.
I agree with much of the sentiment. I agree with getting angry. I’m unsure this guy deserves the anger for not stepping up. Maybe his head isn’t in the game at the moment. Maybe he knows he needs a break. Be angry at him for his policy decisions, sure, but this, it’s hard for me to see people stoning him.
That he thinks the big 0 getting re-elected is job #1, now that does make me angry. It’s strategically flawed on some levels. He’s out of office because of people like Obama who have rebranded Dems into traitors to the New Deal and facilitators and enablers of the wrecking crews.
Who knows, but I’m pretty convinced at this point that the whole political system is fake.
Professional wrestling and prostitution are more honest than this false and two dimensional political system.
It really is incomprehensible, isn’t it? How can anyone begin to explain the total loss of representation of progressive values in federally elected office? There are none. Zero. Statistically that should be impossible.
Frankly, I don’t care at this point what reason there may be, if reason has anything to do with it. If they are being blackmailed, they should resign. If they are corrupt dishonest hacks, they should lose their seats.
Every incumbent should get kicked to the curb at the earliest opportunity.
But, forgive me, while I don’t hold me breath ; )
Anyone else here think that Ron Paul may sneak in the back door in 2012?
The Obama/Reid congress have so fu**ed any faith in Dems that Dems and Independents only near choice is Ron Paul. You’re damn right he’s horrible if you look at the details – but W. didn’t make it to two term by our brain dead voters checking out the details.
I’ve talked to a bunch of people here in Az, including Independents and hard core Republicans – all favored Paul.
Doesn’t matter how many favor him. The establishment picks the candidates.
There are more of us than there are of them. That’s got to count for something.
That is why we MUST think post politics as we know and loath them.
That is why we have a fundmental RIGHT as human beings to defend ourselves against “accumulations” of BOTH wealth and power. An INALIENABLE right.
We did not start this class war … however WE have a right to FINISH it, OmAli.
DW
There is a good program that ran on PBS last night about the singing revolution in Estonia. We could adapt some of those measures. But it is going to mean taking risks, and once you open such an unfamiliar door who knows what’s on the other side, or if you can ever turn around and come back?
Does it?
The marketing, group infiltration, media consolidation, just the money in the hands of criminal elites, their advantage has evolved while our resources to counter them are shriveling.
The dollars count for something.
God, I know it. And they just keep pouring in.
Mario Savio:
“There’s a time when the operation of the machine becomes so odious—makes you so sick at heart—that you can’t take part. You can’t even passively take part. And you’ve got to put your bodies upon the gears and upon the wheels, upon the levers, upon all the apparatus, and you’ve got to make it stop. And you’ve got to indicate to the people who run it, to the people who own it, that unless you’re free, the machine will be prevented from working at all.” Sproul Hall Steps, December 2, 1964[6]“
In the course of human events … there ARE Rubicons which MUST be crossed.
One does not walk back movements toward freedom and independence, nor toward justice, whether political, social, legal, or economic …
Just as there is neither true safety nor true security in ANY tyranny, OmAli.
DW
Agreed and I think we need to support in word and deed that risk taking.
What do we have to lose except each others everything?
What do we have to gain, but our world and our time, forest, and the freedom to be fully alive in both?
;~DW
sad smile here
I’ve often said that we were better off without Feingold. I remember in the healthcare debate …….. I can’t remember the exact issue, but I think it might have been the push for Medicare for all. At the point, there was serious headcounting and talk of using reconcilation. And we needed every vote and every voice of support we could get.
Where was Feingold? He announced that he was a ‘no’ vote. Not because he didn’t agree with the end result, but because he didn’t agree with the process being used to achieve the goal. And I remember sitting in front of my tv with my mouth hanging open. We were losing to GOP obsruction, lives of millions Americans were being affected, and he didn’t like the PROCESS???
I knew right then and there that he was one of those ‘all talk’ liberals and not a fighter. We need fighters.
I agree and contrary to common wisdom, it may be easier done than said if the movement is made personal and local. I’m prepared for this being a longterm struggle, it’s so damn frustrating though.
OmAli, that is a great quote.
I can not believe you guys are so naive about politics. I will admit I was taken in by the change thing but I’m coming to accept reality. Come on, politics is politics and politicians are politicians. That does not change. Of course, it does not mean that slavery, womens suffrage, segregation, civil rights and robber barons can eventually be dealt with if not sometimes 100s of years too late and only when public outcry becomes undeniable. Bashing politicians for being political will not get us anywhere. We still have to work within the frame work of what is realistic. No politician can change the system by themselves or even together unless the outcry and the voice of the people requires it which all goes back to the media propaganda and the state of the crazies it has produced. I think Feingold having lost a race and no doubt knowing the extent of the big money infusion and voting system irregularities is being cautious. That Obama would ever pick a liberal like Feingold as a running mate is laughable. Maybe you were not serious. And why would anyone not work for Obama when the alternative is to end up with one of the Republican candidates. Have you all lost your minds? I am sure I will soon be blocked from commenting.
I didn’t believe that Feingold would have much of a chance against Walker either based on the fact that he did lose big in 2010 as you said. I think you may be right about what it would take to oust Walker.
You say, “If they are being blackmailed, they should resign.” You are making an erroneous assumption that the blackmail involves a truthful accusation.
I certainly would not put it past the powers that be to phony-up accusations and fabricate “evidence.”
In many cases, the stench of an accusation will not wash away, no matter how effectively the politician may be able to refute it. And the financial and emotional costs of fighting off false charges can be, in many cases, just too damned much.
You have the real reason. Even though he’d make a fool out of Walker in any debate, assuming Walker would agree (he’d need the ALEC ear-piece, could borrow Bush’s), the Kochs would throw the store at Feingold because he is a so-called, but not actual, progressive, and his McCain-Feingold stance on election contribution limitation, even the “notion,” is the anthesis of the Citizens United treason and the rest of what the Kochs stand for, and demand. They’d simply call him a tax Jew, go right to fascist roots.
No I’m not. A person cannot be blackmailed without their consent, whether the accusation is true or false.
I would argue it is essential for a person to fight back, especially when the accusation is false.
Feingold is apparently smart enough to recognize that running for any office except President in 2012 would make him a fraud. That he is unwilling to run against Obama in 2012 is a disappointment, but an expected one. Should he run for any office soon after having evaded the thorny issue of the 2012 election, I would still consider him disqualified – he who is able to but unwilling to purposefully wager himself in a primary does not deserve public office in any context.
Feingold is, whatever good deeds he did and whatever good intentions he might have remaining, an incumbent of the atrocious period from 1992 to 2010, and the conclusive failure of all elected representatives involved to discharge their sworn duties under the constitution. He was, all things considered, ineffectual as a Senator.
That might very well be a flaw of the office – a point that Warren would do well to take into consideration – but the proposition that he would be possibly more effective as anything but a Presidential candidate – let alone President – is unconvincing on first principles. Past performance predicts future results.
Much easier said than done. Unless you’ve actually walked that walk, or know first-hand about someone who has, you are just stating an ideal that, in my mind, is entirely unrealistic.
P.S.: You could just ask the West Memphis Three about how easy it is to fight untruthful accusations all the way.
After his foldo on the Public Option I started referring to him here and in other places as Phonygold or Whinegold. I took some shit for that.
Now that he’s come out 100% behind Zero and Osterity, I’m guessing I won’t be hearing much criticism for using those terms.
Of course, after this, there may never be a need to mention this chickenshit little punk again. One can only hope.
Apparently Elizabeth Warren has decided to embrace obscurity in the US Senate, an institution that is designed to stifle meaningful progress.
Feingold should have the label “progressive” immediately disassociated from his person. What an disappointment.
Righto. Members of Congress are just like Damien Echols, Jessie Misskelly Jr. and Jason Baldwin, complete unknowns … with no access to the press or the people or a “dream team” of well-know attorneys.
Pesonally, I think it likely that another $ort of pre$$ure, you know, what one might po$$ibly “earn” over the coming year$, i$ being brought to bear, but what that might be, $pecifically, i$ quite a my$tery. $eriou$ly.
DW
You are so totally right, actually expecting our elected representatives to do the job they promised when campaigning is so totally unrealistic. Why we should sit around and make excuses for them all day long, then thank them for betraying us. What was I thinking?
If you can’t take the damn heat, get out of the kitchen.
O.M.G. Seriously? THAT is your analogy???
Next time at least go with Don Siegelman.
You do realize that eighteen Dim members of Congress are worth between six and one hundred and nintey three MILLION dollars, right, you do know that, SP?
So yes, they are just like those three chaps …
As phred suggests, you need a somewhat better comparison …
Those three, with a bit of help, fought the false, clearly false, accusations against them … and you suggest that those sitting on their butts in Congress just don’t have the merest gumption to even protest if wrongly (or even rightly) accused? Remember Weiner?
Politicians are the thinest-skinned beings on this planet; observe them squirm at the thought of doing their jobs unless rewarded, most lavishly, on the other side of the revolving door.
It is enough to consider them, complicit, or cowardly inept, or even willfully stupid, but “cowed” … not their sacred (not scared … yet) bovine selves.
Would this being “blackmailed” apply to poor ole Mr. Osterity as well?
Forgive my rant, SP, but this blackmail crap has loooooooooong annoyed me.
For, if true, then we are witness to an acting job that would make the Bard weep in utter and profound amazement, that no actor or actress has fluffed a line, stubbed a towed line, or crossed some invisible line. What dramatic mastery we see before us … and sustained so well, so loooooooooooong, so seamlessly ‘midst such sound and such fury …
;~DW
Sorry, but I still disagree. My point is that DECENT members of Congress, ones who are not millionaires (and, yes, I have long known that there are a lot of Dem multi-millionaires) can very well be blackmailed with false accusations. You and phred are painting with a brush that is far too broad. One size does not fit all.
Who do you imagine are being blackmailed, SP, a few, some, many, or all?
If you’ve a theory, then lay it out, please.
Otherwise it is mere speculation that absolves the failure as inevitable and unavoidable.
And implies that NOTHING can, ever, change.
DW
I’ve decided to register as a Republican to help out Ron Paul. He is appalling, but his platform on civil liberties and the military budget make him the only significant candidate worth voting for.
No. One size never fits all. But on that basis, your blackmail excuse for every member of Congress doesn’t exactly wash then either does it?
Yep, it’s just another dreary, “but it’s not their fault” whine of an excuse.
Bullshit. From start to finish. Total bullshit.
Comparing politicians to prostitutes is demeaning to prostitutes.
Please refer to them accurately as our “selected” rather than “elected” representatives, especially when we’re generally allowed only two choices.
there have been so deaths IE wellstone and reputation deaths IE spitzer i wonder if real librals are slowly becoming more and more hesitant to run or serve. we all have families that could be threatened in order to keep us in line. i just wonder if feingold got a phone call he couldn’t refuse. i know its crazy but i wouldn’t be surprised if it happened all the time. we are a democracy in name only
So, the only “honor” which “operates” is that of total omerta?
Not only does this suggest that the veneer of civilisation is thin, indeed, which I do not doubt, it implies that no one “selected” to “represent” the people may possess even the most miserable vestage of principle or courage.
Yet no one is to be held to ANY account, for as phred says, ” … it’s not their fault.”?
I consider the political class pathetic enough; with this added and encompassing “patina” of total, empty spinelessness … we must consider those in public office to be prime examples of the genus Coelomata, rendering our collective Coenaesthesis, politically and socially, both moot and ludicrously useless.
What is the latest date on which the world, as we know it, is slated to end, whimpering, lame, and decidedly halt?
Bullock pies abound, to a depth of many meters, all over this sad and empty landscape of privilege, profit, and empty pontification.
DW
Maybe Kucinich, maybe leaders of the Progressive Caucus. I was not saying that it was actually happening. If you will review the posts, you will see that I started this debate by questioning phred’s statement that any Congressmember who is being blackmailed is either, ipso facto, a crook (because the accusation must be true, because he/she is a politician and therefore inherently corrupt) or if on the off-chance that it is false, the member should just use some of his/her megamillions in personal wealth to combat the accusation to the bitter end.
No recognition of the fact that the accusation just might be false; no recognition of the fact that the sting of an accusation will be hard, if not impossible, to wipe away; no recognition of the fact that a member will likely lose committee posts and donations and may well lose re-election simply because of the fact that the accusation has been made.
I consider this opinion and your endorsement of it to be based on no actual facts.
And you offer what, SP?
Nothing but totally empty suspicion and the total acceptance that no evidence is proof positive.
As well, you make legitimate, by implication, the notion that no one may be questioned, for it might put them at some unspecified, yet dire risk, and by no means are they to be held responsible for their clear dereliction of sacred duty and Constitutional responsibility.
Humor me, for a moment, if you might?
Who, precisely, or in a generally vague way, is blackmailing these souls, Obama, the DNC, or the oligarchs, themselves.
If ’tis the oligarchs, then are Obama and the ENTIRE Democratic party not also innocent victims?
WHO is doing what you suspect and believe to be so?
DW
Coming back to this late, maybe too late for anyone to see, but I wonder about the various types of blackmail. There’s blackmail that involves matters not criminal, and perhaps not even a threat to a political career, but embarrassing nonetheless.
What about blackmail that threatens the job or reputation of a family member — child, spouse, parent, etc? Might not someone be pressured into line by a threat of damage being done to a loved one? Here’s a hypothetical: Say you have a daughter in college. She foolishly engages in some on-line vidcam masturbation for her boyfriend. NSA sweeps up this in its normal daily sweep of all electronic communication. Since you’re an important elected official, everyone connected to you is given priority screening for the purposes of creating a dossier of damaging material.
Then somebody shows you this video and explains how, unless you play ball, it can be anonymously and untraceably uploaded to the net, then its existence made known to the folks at TMZ, Brietbart, Drudge, etc. In rare cases a really strong politician might say, “Go ahead, expose it. I’m not changing my position or my vote”. But many people aren’t that strong. In this example, they might not want to risk forever marring their daughter’s life. They might be forced to give in by their spouse, or risk irreparable damage to their marriage.
Another sex-based scheme: your perfectly normal 17 year-old son is having sex with his 16 year-old girlfriend, an action which is, however, statuatory rape in your home state. You’re informed that this can go unreported, or your son can end up with a stat rape charge and have to register forever as a sex offender. (Which, incidentally, can disqualify him from certain careers and licenses, will show up on job and security clearance background checks, and interfere with his ability to buy or rent a house via Megan’s Law.)
Bottom line: there’s blackmail, and then there’s blackmail.
So you postulate a bunch of “actors”, independently engaged in plying their “trade”?
Rather than some overarching entity happily pulling the strings of its puppets to the amusement of an audience full of Bourbonesque perspective and sociopathic delight?
This is always the “rub” for me, BP, WHO is doing the dirty, the BIG dirty, and how fortunate their all-knowing on-the-spotivity.
Such wisdom as this, were it not perverted, would be the marvel of the universe, unless it is simply premised on the notion that such “suasion” NEVER can fail owing to the suseptibility of all.
Only the devil or a fallen deity could manage such an endless and even immortal task – unless human “nature” is predisposed to ALWAYS act in certain predictable ways, thus rendering the very notion of freedom or free will utterly moot.
What thinkest thou?
;~DW
What thinkest I?
I thinkest that I’m confused by your reply. So lemme break it down into pieces:
- Are we not afraid (as per Glenn Greenwald today) of the power of the surveillance security state to interfere in politics via dirty tricks, one of which would be blackmail of political opponents?
- Did we not see a long period in which J. Edgar Hoover exerted undemocratic control over politicians and policies by virtue of his private (incriminating) files on political players and their families?
- Is it not possible that while most politicians can be swayed by bribes coming from lobbyists, in a few situations blackmail of one sort or another is needed to turn the otherwise defiant? Isn’t that the premise of “What did they threaten Kucinich with on that flights”?
IOW, isn’t blackmail simply another weapon in the vast arsenal employed by the oligarchy and their minions, in and out of government?
“… the oligarchy and their minions, in and out of government.”
Ah, more specific.
Should those who would be representatives of the people be … forewarned?
Should those who would be representatives of the people be asked about the occurrance of such things in the course of their “careers”?
Should any of these questions ever be asked?
How shall we ever know?
Is bribery blackmail?
Is the promise of lucrative rewards on the other side of the revolving door a part of this blackmail?
Is there anything which normal human beings can do to find out if such things go on or is it a mystery which will be forever unknown and unknowable?
If these political types are willing to be blackmailed, then what does that suggest for the capacity of the people to “reason” with such blackmailed beings?
Do the peole merely need to discover some more powerful “incentive”, to induce the uncovering of truth?
If you are correct, BP, then the strongest, those who blackmail, will never, short of something akin to waterboarding, be “cracked” … but what of the evidently “weaker”, those who have been offered an offer they simply cannot refuse? What of the weak links, what might cause THEM to to break free of their chains?
BP, if you see no possible way of changing this method of oligarchic warfare, then how may battle in this class war ever be joined? Except by moving past and beyond politics as we know it?
Are you game for that adventure?
Or do you propose that we “work” with was “IS”?
Does that question vex your soul?
The un-bullied pulpit is yours …
DW
That makes the most sense. It will be amusing to watch Barry throw him under the bus, though, getting Russ as VP could rebuild his collapsed left. It may also be the best chance to get Russ in 2016, but I am not sure if he will be worth it.
I don’t think that finegold would add that much now. As vp he would not really be in a position to govern. That would indicate that he is more interested in symbol than substance. He would do a lot more for the progressive cause as governor that as vp. Plus, he would put himself in a far stronger position to be nominated to be pres from a governor’s chair.