There are only a few things that get Kossacks worked up into unexplainable and ugly frenzies--gender issues, for example, or Kos's ethics. I generally try to avoid them.
But, as I operate from here behind the Cheddar Curtain, it's my responsibility to bring you this story about two of those things that get us worked up into the unexplainable frenzies. Those two things--a presidential primary and Israel--have come together in a statement by Wisconsin senator Russ Feingold at a town hall meeting this afternoon:
U.S. Sen. Russ Feingold today defended Israel's right to protect itself amid the escalating conflict along its borders, saying, "I don't think any country is going to let their soldiers be kidnapped, transported, killed ... without a serious response."
Feingold said he would not second-guess "whether that response was exactly as it should be."
Said Feingold: "My hope would be that Israel would use as much restraint as possible .... It's in Israel's interest and the interests of peace. But I do think Israel has not only a right but also a responsibility to respond to the Hezbollah attack." [. . .]
The subject was raised at listening sessions Feingold held today in Platteville [Wisconsin] and in Dubuque [Iowa], the first in his capacity as a senator and the second, a political event.
When a constituent at the Wisconsin session criticized both the Palestinians and the Israeli government for taking a "dysfunctional" approach to the conflict and said the U.S. needed to "lean on Israel" to change its behavior, Feingold offered a different view.
"There's blame to go around for everybody," he said, but he argued that Israel had been acting constructively in recent years and blamed Hezbollah, Iran and Syria for provoking the current crisis.
"They are facing a two-front war now, and it's a tiny country," Feingold said of Israel.
Feingold posted a statement on his Web site Friday saying, "I stand firmly with the people of Israel and their government as they defend themselves against these outrageous attacks."
The current conflict is getting a lot of ink both here and elsewhere around the blogs, with many people pretty sure this may be the beginning of World War Three. And many of the bloggers on this side of the aisle are knocking Israel for its role in escalating the conflict, sympathizing with the Lebanese and Palestinians under fire.
This is an issue that I really, really, really try not to get involved in, partly because I don't feel that I know the region and its history well enough. If I ever ran for office and someone asked me, I'd have a hard time answering at all.
However, as I said in the intro text here, I know that many of you do get involved in the issue--and the many diaries about the newest round of fighting over the last few days is testament to that. I also know that Russ Feingold is a favorite son here, winning the last 2008 primary straw poll handily.
So here's my question: Does this do anything to anyone's feelings about Russ as Candidate?
And what should a 2008 candidate be saying about the issue now? Should they be staying out of it, figuring that by this time next year, when primary season gets really hot, everything will be different? Should they be making a stronger stand than Feingold, on one side or the other? I'm sure many of the Republicans in the hunt will start lining up with the neocons to say that Israel's war is our war, making the case for taking out Iran and Syria as soon as possible. But what should Dems do?