A recurring rubric at James Taranto's Best of the Web Today column at the Wall Street Journal online is "We Blame George W. Bush," for tongue-in-cheek blaming of the former prez for things palpably beyond his purview. Let's add another item to the list. Dem senator Russ Feingold has blamed his tough re-election race on, yes, W.
Let's think about that. If Bush were such a bad president. If his policies were so disastrous for the country. Wouldn't that boost the chances of an incumbent Dem senator who, like Feingold, had voted against Bush policies every step of the way?
Hey, I don't try to understand Dem reasoning: I just report it. Feingold made his logic-defying allegation on this evening's Ed Show.
ED SCHULTZ: Even the progressive Russ Feingold is in a real tough fight for his seat in Wisconsin. Senator Feingold is a progressive—as progressive as you can get—he voted against the Iraq war, he voted against the Patriot Act, he voted against the Wall Street bailouts; all very strong progressive positions. But somehow we've gotten to the point where the less a candidate knows about Washington it seems the better off they are, and now Feingold, a guy who has always fought the good liberal fight is up against a candidate who is trying to buy the election so he can go to Washington and extend the Bush tax cuts for the rich.
Senator Russ Feingold joins us tonight, here on the Ed Show. Senator, good to have you with us tonight. You know, you have been one of the most hard-working guys out there. You do over 70 town hall meetings a year. What are you hearing in Wisconsin? And why are you polling below 50%?
RUSS FEINGOLD: Well, this is a year of challenges because of the mess that was left us from the Bush years.
Wait a second, Russ! If Bush were so awful, and you fought Bush every step of the way as Ed documented, wouldn't that make you a winner in Wisconsin? Could it possibly be that, now under Obama and a Dem congress, W [to quote those old Cross Your Heart commercials] is looking "suddenly shaplier"?
