With Feingold out of the picture, the names now being tossed around seem boring to me.

Progressive Sen. Russ Feingold has done many things for both the state of Wisconsin and the United States of America.

He was the only senator to vote against the PATRIOT Act. After President Bush refused to change his domestic spying program into one where congressional oversight would be utilized, Feingold sponsored a motion to censure him for his blatant disregard of the American people’s right to privacy.

He was one of a few progressive Congress-people to vote against granting Bush authorization to use force against Iraq. He was also a champion of campaign finance reform.

One thing he will not be is president.

After months of speculation, Feingold announced last week that he will not seek the presidency in 2008. His decision was made in part because, in his own words, “I cannot muster the same enthusiasm for a race for president while I am trying simultaneously to advance our agenda in the Senate.”

Feingold’s greatest flaw is that he cares too deeply about us, that his convictions are too deep to jeopardize misrepresenting the people of Wisconsin if he were to run for a higher office. It is ironic that such a man would choose to be so devoted to his people, and yet it is his personal loyalty to his constituency that prevents him from running for the highest office in the land. That, my dear readers, is true patriotism.

We need more people like Feingold; 10 senators made in his likeness could solve most, if not all, of the problems facing us today. Feingold’s study of each problem is incredibly meticulous — he ponders over every detail. It seems that he thinks first about how each piece of legislation would affect his fellow Wisconsinites and American citizens. If that is what we consider to be rare in American politics — that our representatives be genuine and actually care about our liberties — then the need for senators like Feingold is greater than we could ever have anticipated.

With Feingold out of the picture, the names now being tossed around seem boring to me. John Kerry may seek another shot at the White House, which in my opinion is the worst idea ever: how can we expect a man who couldn’t beat George W. Bush to beat a man of actual stature like John McCain? Then there’s the Hillary (that’s right: THE Hillary). It’s fairly obvious that she will make a run for president and, with a large campaign war-chest that she didn’t use in her re-election this year for Senate, she has the most money to spend of all the Democrats.

Finally, a potential dark-horse candidate is emerging within the grassroots: former Gen. Wesley Clark. A former Rhodes Scholar (similar to Feingold), Clark is seen as someone who has the ability to connect with moderates. He was former allied commander for NATO during the Kosovo War, and also served in Vietnam. Finally, Clark is appealing due to the fact that he’s never held a governmental office, so his past stances on issues that could hurt him aren’t known. However, this could also be considered a point of contention against him running — he lacks experience.

Whoever the Democrats choose, one thing’s for sure: he or she will not match up to the incredibly high pedestal I have placed Sen. Feingold on.

> Comments