Get a load of them apples...

**The Following is a list of newspapers and people who have endorsed 
Russ Feingold in this year's Senate race against Weenie-Boy Mark Neumann.**

Feingold the thoughtful Senate choice
From the Journal Sentinel
October 25, 1998

This year, Wisconsin voters are in a position to choose between two Senate
candidates who, thanks to their service in Washington, have compiled records
by which they can be judged. They also bring to the campaign sharply
different notions of what government ought to do.

Unfortunately, the campaign has been marred by ads so grossly misleading and
behalf of the Republican candidate -- that they have themselves become an
issue. So powerful and numerous have these ads become that they have
obscured some of the bona fide issues that affect the day-to-day lives of
citizens -- problems such as the preservation of Social Security, the reform
of election campaign finance laws and changes in tax policy.

In our view, the candidate with more insight into these problems, the
candidate better equipped for and devoted to the task of giving Wisconsin
residents the clean, progressive, effective government they expect and
deserve, is the incumbent, Democrat Russ Feingold.

Some 44 million Americans, as many as one-third of them disabled, depend on
Social Security. In the effort to shore up the system, Feingold has
consistently opposed tax cuts that would deprive the government of funds
necessary to keep the Social Security Trust Fund healthy and strong. He has
developed a simple, common sense plan that would ensure the continued
strength of that system by requiring the government to adopt permanent
budget rules designed to prevent raids on the trust fund.

Feingold's GOP opponent, Rep. Mark Neumann, has proposed a law that looks a
little like a shell game. Under his plan, government IOUs that now
underwrite the trust fund would be replaced with what he calls "real
assets," such as U.S. Treasury bonds. But independent experts who have
examined this strategy have belittled it, one of them asserting that
Neumann's plan would merely substitute one form of IOU for another.

The spectacular abuses that so disfigured the 1996 presidential campaign and
that continue to pollute the electoral system make the need for campaign
finance reform both urgent and obvious.

Together with Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), Feingold has championed a bill
that would curb many of these abuses, earning a national reputation as a
champion of election reform. He has courageously and voluntarily limited the
amount of money he will spend in this campaign. Neumann has made a similar
pledge, but with a few more caveats.

Heedless of the spectacular abuses in the 1996 campaign and others, Neumann
voted against a House version of the McCain-Feingold bill and has made the
ostrich-like claim that campaign finance reform is best dealt with on a
voluntary basis.

Laws to end the badgering of taxpayers and to eliminate other abuses by the
Internal Revenue Service have been supported by Feingold and many others.
Neumann, by contrast, has embraced a popular but irresponsible gimmick that
would abolish the tax code by 2003 and use the interim to set up a simpler,
less costly system. It is reckless in the extreme to abandon the current
system in the absence of even a debate over what might be used to raise the
money the government needs to do its work.

On a variety of other issues -- abortion rights, military spending, school
prayer, flag desecration and environmental protection -- Feingold has taken
moderate, thoughtful and progressive stands, whereas Neumann has sometimes
moved toward extremism and engaged in demagoguery.

On Nov. 3, every vote will count, especially this year: Polls show the race
is a dead heat. Wisconsin voters who want clean, progressive and effective
representation in Washington will choose Feingold.

‘Our Senator’ keeps his word; he deserves re-election

by Mitch Bliss
Listening Post
Janesville Gazette

The navy blue and white yard signs proclaim "Feingold—Our Senator."

The message fits.

For the uninitiated, Feingold is Russ (or Russell as his election foe
prefers), serving his first term of six years in the U.S. Senate.

The 45-year-old Janesville native, who now makes his home in Middleton,
knows Wisconsin north to south, east to west, and points in between. Each
year he devotes major amounts of time and energy visiting all the state’s 72
counties while conducting his "listening sessions." It’s a pledge fulfilled
when he made his initial Senate run in 1992. In six years he’s conducted a
remarkable 432 of those meetings.

More than that, it underlines a Feingold trait—his word is good. He does
what he says he’ll do. No hollow campaign promises. How many politicians are
in that category?

Each election year that passes becomes more sickening from a campaign
finance standpoint. Unregulated "soft" money that can be channeled into
campaigns with its sources unaccounted for is a national disgrace. With
campaign reform dead for the time being, political action committees are
enjoying a banner election cycle.

If Feingold had his way, the entire controlling mechanism would be rebuilt.

Democrat Feingold, along with Sen. John McCain, an Arizona Republican, have
lobbied vigorously in recent years for just such reform. Their relentless
efforts have fallen a bit short of a Senate majority, but they’ve persisted
and surely will renew their battle in a new Congress.

Feingold also has proved to be a prudent and responsible voice of the people
in federal fiscal matters.

A year ago, Feingold was one of three U.S. Senators cited by the Green
Scissors Campaign for cutting wasteful government spending that harms the
environment. Green Scissors is a coalition of groups including The Concord
Coalition, Taxpayers for Common Sense, Friends of the Earth and the U.S.
Public Interest Group.

In learning of the honor, Feingold said, "My top priority since I was
elected to the U.S. Senate in 1992 has been to eliminate wasteful spending,
reduce the deficit. That’s the only way to balance the budget over the long
term."

The hard-driving Feingold says his political goal is to work on issues that
unite people; the right wing, he says, is trying to find ways to divide people.

Feingold has indeed made a mark in Washington in a variety of ways,
including high-profile issues such as budget, campaign finance reform and
the environment. He’s fair, focused, a quick-learn, friendly, accessible,
honest and loaded with integrity.

In short, he’s "our senator," a strong representative for a widely diverse
population found in the Badger state.

A continuation of the sterling service that marked Feingold’s past
half-dozen years is crucial to Wisconsin and to the nation.

(Mitch Bliss is the retired editor of The Janesville Gazette).

St. Paul Pioneer Press
Sunday, October 25, 1998

Wisconsin voters should re-elect Feingold

Wisconsin voters have the opportunity to serve themselves and the nation
well in a decisive election for the U.S. Senate. The scorching campaign
between incumbent Russ Feingold of Middleton and Mark
Neumann of Janesville offers distinct choices on fiscal and social issues.
It offers different visions of public responsibility. And it offers a unique
chance for Wisconsin to demonstrate that walking the talk is crucial for
political success.

Feingold, a Democrat seeking his second term, is known nationally for his
leadership and bipartisan initiative to limit the influence of campaign
money. He has made powerful foes intent on taking the "Feingold'' out of
McCain-Feingold as the Republican Senatorial Campaign Committee pumps soft
money into Wisconsin.

Feingold said at the outset of this campaign that he would limit hard money
to $3.8 million, a dollar for each Wisconsin voter, and that he would not
take outside financial assistance. The conventional wisdom is that this is
mutually assured destruction in the face of an opponent more than willing to
watch the soft money roll in.

It remains to be seen in this last tough week whether Feingold supporters
outside Wisconsin can resist the urge to respond with money the Feingold
campaign has pledged not to seek. As of last week, Feingold's campaign
counted 75 percent to 80 percent of its contributions as coming from inside
Wisconsin.

As a national race, this Senate campaign will go miles toward saying whether
voters care about means as well as ends.

For Wisconsin citizens, of course, this is not a national election, but one
to select a senator to represent them in Washington.

Neumann, 44, who is finishing a second term now in the House of
Representatives from the 1st Congressional District, offers voters an
anti-tax and highly conservative social agenda. His campaign chose not to
interview for endorsement by the Pioneer Press, so our assessment comes from
his record, his campaign statements and reporting on this contest.

Neumann has been stressing hot-button issues, such as abortion (he is
against abortion even to save the life of the mother) and flag-burning. His
fiscal message is lower taxes and reducing the federal debt. Neumann has
demonstated fiscal efficiency in running his office under budget and
returning money to the Treasury.

Feingold, 45, points to promises kept during his first term, including
coming home to listen. He did that in all 72 counties at 432 meetings. He is
taking major hits in the attack ad war for ``raising taxes'' via his vote
for the 1993 budget agreement. That's a simplistic analysis. In fact,
Feingold hit Washington that year with a list of 82 items to cut, reduce,
save and consolidate toward balancing the federal budget. More than half of
those proposals made it into the fiscal discipline regime.

Feingold, for instance, has a better rating from the deficit-hawk Concord
Coalition than does Neumann. Feingold advocates a national conversation
about the arcane tax code. Like Neumann, Feingold keeps an eye on office
expenses. He does not use the frank for mass mailings and he returns the
money from a congressional pay raise that passed over his opposition.

Feingold has a stellar record on environmental issues, especially water
pollution. He maintains a solid focus on education policy that stresses
success for young learners and access to higher education. He has his eyes
on both the social and fiscal value of programs that help senior citizens
live independently, avoiding the drain on Medicare. In this campaign,
Feingold is stressing the Wisconsin model for reducing class sizes for early
grades.

On foreign affairs, Feingold sits on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
His emphasis is on human rights and on anti-corruption initiatives that have
produced dramatic results as business-growth and political
confidence-building tools in other nations.

He is among the most impressive members of the Senate as a policy thinker
and focused lawmaker. Feingold is also superbly direct in walking the talk
of decent, centrist governing. He was elected in 1992 over incumbent Robert
Kasten, who was a workmanlike senator but not developing as a leader in the
Senate. Feingold, first in the majority as a Democrat and now in the
minority, wasted no time on the back benches. He came out running hard for
fiscal discipline, rational social service programs and cleaning up the bad
habits of the institution in which he serves.

Based on peformance and the values he advances, we endorse Russ Feingold for
re-election to the U.S. Senate.

Racine Journal Times Endorsement
Oct. 28, 1998

Wisconsin voters have an opportunity to cast a long shadow 
with their choice Tuesday between incumbent Sen. Russ Feingold, 
D-Wis., and his opponent, U.S. Rep. Mark Neumann, R-Janesville. 
Many voters have already made up their minds on single issues 
that are being pushed by voting blocs on positions like the 
campaign finance reform, Social Security, taxes and government 
spending.  After they weigh in, we expect it will be up to 
independent voters to swing the election.

We would urge them to cast their ballots in favor of Sen. 
Russ Feingold. Feingold has demonstrated an honesty, integrity 
and thoughtfulness in his first term in manner consistent with 
Wisconsin's great tradition of political independence and free 
thinking.

He has been a champion of national campaign finance reform 
and we would send him back to Washington, D.C., to get that job 
done before they post a "for sale" sign on Congress. True to his 
word, Feingold has kept the promises he painted on his garage 
door in his first campaign -- taking no pay raise, visiting each 
county to meet with constituents.

He brought his campaign finance reform beliefs to his own 
re-election race and told the Democratic Party not to spend 
unregulated "soft money" on issue ads on his behalf.

That integrity has tightened the race as the Republican 
Party pumps money into nasty, half truth attack ads on Neumann's
 behalf. By some estimates, Feingold will end up a 3-1 underdog 
in terms of total dollars spent on candidate political 
advertising in the race.

Neumann has said that while he doesn't like the spending by
 outside groups, "unilaterally disarming is foolhardy." Neumann 
has pointed to the voluntary campaign spending limits agreed to 
by the candidates themselves and says federal regulations are not 
needed.

We disagree, strongly, and believe this race may prove 
pivotal in the effort to wrest our government back from special 
interestinfluence nationwide.

On other issues, such as Social Security, Feingold has taken 
a more conservative -- in the best sense of that word -- stance 
than Neumann, insisting there should be no raiding of those funds
 for tax cuts. Not until the budget is balanced -- without 
borrowing from the Social Security Trust Fund -- would Feingold 
advocate tax cuts. We have agreed with that position in the past 
and continue to share that view.

The abortion issue is another area that splits these 
candidates. Neumann has tried to paint Feingold as favoring 
partial-birth abortion, and the pro-life movement has targeted 
both Wisconsin senators for recall efforts for voting against a
 ban on the procedure.

Feingold says he is in favor of banning all later-term 
abortions as long as there are exceptions if there is a threat of
 life-endangerment or grievous physical injury to the mother. He 
is pro-choice on early stage abortions.

While Neumann supporters have used the partial-birth issue 
to attack Feingold, Neumann himself has been murky on his 
position of abortion in general. He says he is pro-life, but also
 says the issue of early-term abortions is a tough question.
 At the same time, this year he filled out a form from a 
Republican group opposed to abortion indicating that he was 
opposed to abortions even in case of rape and incest.

Feingold, it seems to us, offers forthright views on his 
positions even when they do not necessarily appear politically 
smart. Neumann, on the other hand, has ducked the question on one
 end of an issue while using and carrying out an attack style of 
campaign on the other end.

Neumann's confrontational style has been at times petty and
 vindictive -- such as in the televised debate where he snapped 
at a question from a UW-River Falls student and accused her of 
asking a question set up by Feingold. He later apologized. Early
 on in the Campaign, Neumann began calling Feingold by his 
full name "Russell" instead of "Russ" in a not-so-subtle effort 
to characterize Feingold as an elitist.

We see this race as demanding a selection between a 
statesman or a scrappy garden variety political with a zealous 
agenda.

On issues, style and substance, we believe Russ Feingold 
offers a much better choice for the voters and the future of
Wisconsin.

Wausau Daily Herald Endorsement
October 26

The U.S. Rep. Mark Neumann you're seeing in TV commercials
 still is no match for U.S. Sen. Russ Feingold, the genuine 
article.

Feingold lives by his principles.  The author of the only 
campaign finance reform package - McCain/Feingold - that stood a 
chance of passage, he voluntarily limits his spending.

When Feingold, the Democratic incumbent, promised listening 
sessions every year in every county in Wisconsin, he did it (72 
counties times 6 years equals 432).

Neumann's TV ads (cow gas, space monkey, etc.) trivialized 
issues and talked down to voters. Besides that, they were just
plain wrong.

It's a shame Feingold responded. It didn't serve him well.
Neumann's campaigns are sad, really. His 30-second spots demean 
an honorable profession. But they reflect on Neumann, who reacts
 to challenges with vicious attacks, reducing a young woman to 
tears in one memorable public TV moment.

Feingold represents Wisconsin well. A leading advocate for 
dairy farmers since his days in the legislature, he's 
knowledgeable an respected.

His strong environmental record meshes with Wisconsinites'
 concern for the natural beauty of their state. Feingold is 
head-and-shoulders the better candidate in this race.

Vote progressive and clean government. Reelect Russ 
Feingold.

Wisconsin won’t be fooled: return Feingold to Senate

So we’ve been told the eyes of the nation, indeed the world, are upon
Wisconsin as we make a choice of who will represent us in the U.S. Senate
for the next six years.

The fact the Republican Party could achieve a large enough majority in the
Senate to override the veto of a president from the other party is cause
enough for any Senate race to be significant.

That a smart, budget-hawking Congressman from the "Class of 1994" is
challenging a one-term incumbent only raises the level of interest and the
stakes of the outcome. Mark Neumann, a two-term Republican Congressman from
Janesville, faces Russell Feingold, a Democrat first elected to the Senate
in 1992.

On top of that, we’re led to believe the very heart of our democracy of the
people, by the people and for the people is at stake – that moneyed
interests from outside the state can outright buy elections by purchasing
television ads.

We don’t agree, Mr. Feingold.

There are many more important reasons by Wisconsin should "hire you" as
their senator for another six years.

Chief among them is that Feingold is, and will be, a better senator for
Wisconsin.

His record, approach to government and temperament is clearly superior.

Neumann’s talents, particularly for influencing tax policy, are better
suited to the House of Representatives, where tax legislation originates.
Wisconsin’s house delegation will suffer the loss of his entrepreneurial
spirit and common-sense values of building a business and raising a family.

However, we’ve seen Feingold’s thoughtful approach produce a record that’s
more in step with the views of the people of Wisconsin, including the
central themes of the campaign:

 Neumann’s support of the amendment, on the other hand, amounts to little
more than wrapping himself in the flag. Obviously, no one wants to see the
flag desecrated. It’s disgusting and revolting. However, political speech
would be sadly hollow if we amended our Constitution to ban the practice of
flag desecration.

- Abortion. Feingold has a rational stand: abortion should be "rare, safe,
and legal." He supports banning late-term abortions unless "the woman’s life
is at risk or the procedure is necessary to protect the woman from grievous
injury to her physical health."

Neumann has distorted Feingold’s position on partial-birth abortion and made
it a central theme of his campaign. Neumann is against all abortions with an
exception for the life of the mother.

- Taxes and budget. Neumann’s greatest strength as a fiscal watchdog has
been effectively neutralized by Feingold, who has impressive credentials of
his own.

Neumann’s winded ads aside, Feingold has followed a fiscally prudent path.
Feingold’s vote for the 1993 tax package and his vote last year to support
spending cuts in the budget but not the tax cuts demonstrated his adherence
to the principle to put our country on the right path.

An incumbent taking a tax cut package to voters the next year would have
been a sweet sell. Instead, Feingold disputed the notion of a balanced
budget with so many outstanding IOUs for Social Security. Remember, that was
before it was popular for politicians to take that stand or work to fix
Social Security.

Feingold’s approach to government is epitomized by his "listening sessions"
held in every county in the state each year. Keeping that promise for
another six years will be instrumental in keeping touch with the issues that
matter to average people.

Neumann’s campaign, particularly his television ads and those on behalf of
him, gets to the heart of temperament. His campaign has been combative and
venomous. That approach might allow someone to get elected and serve in the
House, but it would be disastrous in the Senate.

The only way to solve the broad and complex issues facing our nation is
through a bipartisan approach that’s more than lip service to the idea we
need to forge a consensus to move forward. Feingold not only understands
that, he’s done it.

Finally, we don’t disagree with Feingold that the interest in this Senate
race is real, that the stakes for the future of campaign finance reform are
significant.

His effort to reform the system is vital, even heroic, considering the force
of the status quo are better armed than those fighting for change.

Our system has a way of working despite the intentions of some to obscure
reality.

We trust that Abraham Lincoln’s observation that you cannot fool all of the
people all of the time will ring true more than 100 years later.

We don’t believe millions of dollars in television ads will fool the people
into believe Russ Feingold isn’t the best person to represent them in the
Senate.

The Reporter
Fond du Lac

Election Endorsement

Feingold's record makes him better choice

He's had to go on the defensive, but U.S. Sen. Russ Feingold has managed to
hold the political high ground inhis election battle with U.S. Rep. Mark
Neumann.

Feingold's decision to halt attack ads put out by the Democratic Senatorial
Cmapaign Committee is in keeping with his stance as a staunch proponent of
campaign finance reform.

A positive repsonse by the voters in re-electing Feingold would guarantee
that needed reforms would be back on track in the next Congress.

It's too bad that Feingold's dogged efforts on behalf of needed campaign
finance reform have not gained a similar interest among all voters. What
he's for is good, but so far it's generating little voter excitement.

It may work to his disadvantage in this race. Neumann will outspend him.

We admire Feingold for sticking to his principles, and hope that they win
out. If they don't , it will be a death-dealing blow to any attempts at
campaign finance reform in the future.

The first-term senator has been painted as waffling on late-term abortion,
but his over-all record as careful spender and a candidate of the people
make him the best choice in Tuesday's election.

His "listening sessions," which take him into every county in Wisconsin at
least once a year are more than a publicity gimmick. They give him an
opportunity to sit with the people who elected him and hear what they have
to say about his performance and the laws they'd like to see in a
representative government.

Challenger Neumann, a two-term representative in the House, has a reputation
of being somewhat of a maverick in Washington, and is waging a strong,
imaginative campaign.

As a result, it's become a tight race, and the focus of not only state but
national attention.

As the challenger Neumann has been able to launch effective attacks on
Feingold's record. The congressman's stand on Social Security has captured
the interest of seniors.

But when you stack Feingold's principles with his strong support of the
environment and gun control, mix in his reputation as a budget-watcher and
credit him with following his own path rather than the party's, we think the
senator has demonstrated in his first term that he deserves to be returned
for a second.
Back to the Weenie Main Page!















This page hosted by 
Get your own Free Home Page