PolitiFact Wisconsin Says Ron Johnson Told The Truth. So He’s a Liar.

Fact checkers are liberal reporters who want to be taken seriously. So instead of writing on the editorial page or the front page, they create “fact check” columns where their liberalism can be used to claim the truth for the left, even when it is a lie.

PolitiFact is the worst of them all. Filled with a bunch of leftists who will claim a lie as the truth to fit their agenda, they are doing it in Wisconsin with Senator Ron Johnson.

In a campaign ad in Wisconsin, Senator Johnson says his opponent Russ Feingold “got paid $8,000 a lecture at Stanford University.”

What did Politifact find?

By our math, based on the course descriptions on Stanford’s website, there were 10 lectures in the first class and nine in the second, for a total of 19 lectures in those classes over the two terms.

If you take $150,000 and divide it by 19, you get approximately $7,895 per lecture. That’s pretty close to the $8,000 mentioned.

And then at the end, Politifact notes, “the math may be right, or close to it.”

So you’d think this would be rated true or mostly true, wouldn’t you?

Not if you are a leftist at Politifact. There, this is rated “mostly false.” Why?

Johnson claims Feingold “got paid $8,000 a lecture at Stanford University.”

While the math may be right, or close to it, the claim implies that the number of lectures is somehow tied to pay grade and ignores the other work required outside of class.

We rate this claim Mostly False.

The math is right, the claim is right, but to Politifact it is a lie.

Is it any wonder people hate the media?

Feingold’s Daughter Connected To Wisconsin Campaign Dark Money

An organization that is pouring hundreds of thousands of dollars into Sen. Russ Feingold’s (D) campaign to recapture his old Senate seat in Wisconsin used its sister entity to employ Feingold’s daughter as recently as this past May. The Humane Society Legislative Fund, not to be confused with local humane societies, is airing a television ad urging voters to cast their ballot for Feingold when they vote in one of the most contentious and closely watched Senate races in the country. As it turns out, Feingold’s daughter spent years working for the Humane Society of the United States, the parent organization of HSLF.

According to filings posted to the Federal Election Commission’s website, the Humane Society Legislative Fund is spending a stunning $399,329.18 on a television ad buy supporting Feingold. The ad began running in Wisconsin on Tuesday according to the filings. The HSLF is located in Washington, D.C.

Feingold’s daughter, Jessica Feingold Lieberson, currently lives in the D.C. metro area and from December 2011 until May of this year, she worked as the Humane Society of the United States’ federal legislative specialist. In that job she was responsible for, “Build[ing] and maintain[ing] coalitions with other nonprofit organizations, industry groups, local and federal law enforcement officials, and religious leaders.”

From 2009 to 2011, Feingold Lieberson was the director of grassroots campaigns for HSUS. According to her LinkedIn profile she, “Organized an array of lobby days, briefings, and press conferences to support organization’s legislative goals.” From 2007 through 2009, she worked as a grassroots coordinator at HSUS.

The Humane Society of the United States does not itself engage in political activity, but the Humane Society Legislative Fund is its political arm. A press release announcing the Wisconsin ad buy explained, “The Humane Society Legislative Fund is a social welfare organization incorporated under section 501(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code and formed in 2004 as a separate lobbying affiliate of The Humane Society of the United States.”

According to a review of independent expenditure filings, Feingold is the only U.S. Senate candidate directly benefiting from HSLF’s independent – so-called “dark money” – campaign efforts right now.

In August, Feingold Lieberson wrote a fundraising solicitation for her dad’s campaign. “[O]ne of the best things about my dad is that he cares so passionately about equality for all women,” she wrote. “I’m so proud of my dad. I can’t wait until he’s back in the Senate standing up for all of us.” The note concluded with a link to an ActBlue fundraising page for Feingold’s Senate campaign.

Lieberson’s time working on federal relations for the Humane Society did overlap with her father’s time in the Senate.

When the HSLF ad starting airing, the Wisconsin Humane Society received numerous calls from viewers unhappy the organization was picking sides in the Senate race. The WHS clarified that it has nothing to do with the advertisement.

Wisconsin: Dem Feingold Broke Promise To Limit Outside Funds In Senate Bid to Unseat Johnson

The race for U.S. Senate in Wisconsin could well determine which party controls the Senate majority next January. Sen. Ron Johnson (R) is facing voters for the first time since he was elected in the 2010 “Tea Party” wave that swept fellow Republican Gov. Scott Walker to office in Wisconsin. Democrats have placed their hopes to capture the seat on Sen. Russ Feingold (D), who served in the Senate for three terms before losing to Johnson.

Republicans have traditionally struggled to hold or win Senate seats in Wisconsin during presidential elections. In fact, the last time a Republican won a Wisconsin Senate race during a presidential year was 1980, when Bob Kasten (R) denied Sen. Gaylord Nelson (D) a fourth term.

Earlier in the cycle the outlook was pretty bleak for Johnson, who had managed to maintain a fairly low profile across the state even while he frequently made waves as a reform minded conservative in Washington. When polled, significant pluralities of Wisconsin voters over the past few years have struggled to even say they have an opinion of Johnson. Two other Wisconsin Republicans, Walker and now-House Speaker Paul Ryan have consumed much of the local GOP’s attention and the media’s coverage with high profile state political battles and the 2012 pick of Ryan as the GOP VP nominee as well as his more recent elevation to the Speaker’s chair.

Feingold used the downtime to give Wisconsin voters a break, disappearing – literally – by taking a U.S. State Department post that sent him to Africa, and taking up teaching at California’s Stanford University Law School. He also taught a class at Milwaukee’s Marquette University Law School, taught some at a small college in Appleton, Wisconsin and started a political action committee, Progressives United, that kept his old campaign machine employed.

Conventional wisdom has been upended in the final couple of months, however, as polls consistently show Johnson and Feingold within the margin of error. Republicans and aligned groups showed some signs of potentially quitting the race, but recent polling as brought them back to the game. While most polls show Johnson down slightly, but well within the margin, at least one recent poll put him 5 points ahead of Feingold. The one poll that has given Feingold a double-digit lead is routinely discarded by Wisconsin politicos because it is notoriously unreliable.

Like Evan Bayh in Indiana, Feingold offered Democrats a known quantity headed into an election year that should have been a GOP sweep. Both are former senators, both have proven fundraising ability and both enjoyed generally good rapport with their state’s voters prior to leaving office. But both have extraordinary amounts of baggage.

Feingold’s declaration that he was the deciding vote in passing ObamaCare isn’t exactly a net positive for him right now. Johnson’s victory in 2010 came largely because of voter frustration with the passage of the Affordable Care Act. A new spate of news stories showing double-digit health insurance premium hikes in Wisconsin and elsewhere, and the departure of several large insurance companies from the marketplace are reminding voters of why they fired Feingold. No attempt to whitewash the new information will erase the fact that consumers are paying more for health insurance now than before ObamaCare, and that their health care plans have been substantially altered, if not outright cancelled.

In the race to raise cash, Feingold has beaten Johnson, $11 million to $7.9 million according to a survey of FEC reports by the left-wing Wisconsin Public Interest Research Group (WISPIRG). But the group also found that Feingold has raised 75.65% of his funds from outside of Wisconsin; Johnson has raised half of his cash in Wisconsin. Feingold promised in 1992, when he first ran for Senate, that he would raise the majority of his campaign funds from inside of Wisconsin. The fact that he has raised fewer dollars in Wisconsin than Johnson, both in real terms and percentage terms, shows his comeback is fueled more by national Democrats than by Wisconsin voters looking to re-elect a beloved favored son.

Here’s the WISPIRG fundraising comparison:


Ironically, one of Feingold’s pet issues while in the Senate was campaign finance reform, and the infamous McCain-Feingold campaign finance law bears his name and fingerprints. While fighting for that bill, Feingold was fined thousands of dollars by the FEC for failing to report over $50,000 in campaign contributions during his 1998 re-election effort.

Evidence that the race is tighter than the Feingold campaign would like it to be came on Tuesday, when Feingold blasted Johnson for supporting a faith-based program that helps unemployed adults in Milwaukee’s inner city transition into the workforce. “It’s not enough to pick people up in a van and send them away a couple hours and have them come back exhausted at the end of the day,” Feingold said of the program.

It was an unforced error.

Another story that could dog Feingold is a new revelation that he charged high school students, a youth camp and a library all in Wisconsin over a thousand dollars each to deliver brief remarks. The speaking fees, which were paid after Feingold left the Senate, came to light when the Washington Free Beacon found Feingold’s ethics disclosure forms from his time at the State Department. The publication pointed out that Feingold was very clear in 2002 about what he wanted from a post-Senate life: “I don’t know what I’d do, but there are so many books to read, so many golf courses to play, so many dollars to make so I can pay the bills.”

Sen. Elizabeth Warren has gone all-in backing Feingold, appearing at events in Wisconsin and regularly sending out e-mails via Feingold’s campaign e-mail list.

Just who wins the Wisconsin Senate race will likely depend in part on how well Donald Trump does in the state. Trump has polled well in northern and northeastern Wisconsin, places Johnson needs to do well in, but his numbers are dismal in heavily GOP southeast Wisconsin. But voters there, informed by conservative talk radio, are likely to turn out for Johnson regardless of their distaste for Trump. Johnson will likely outperform Trump, but if Trump loses in a landslide, that might not be enough. With 13 days to go, the Wisconsin Senate race is still winnable by either side.

Russ Feingold Refuses to Repudiate Disastrous Iran Deal

Since praising President Barack Obama’s Iran deal in January, Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI) has refused to distance himself from the agreement as his campaign to win his old seat back rolls on, and new details about the scope of the accord continue to emerge.

“I think it is right to talk about the great things the President has done,” Feingold told a Milwaukee radio station early in the year. “I mean, he’s accomplished some foreign policy goals that we’ve had for a very long time. . . . He’s helped us avoid a war with Iran, by having this nuclear deal that hopefully will work”.

Iran is still one of three state sponsors of terrorism according to the U.S. State Department, where Feingold worked as a special envoy shortly after losing his 2010 re-election campaign. The latest State Department report on terrorism worldwide concludes:

“In 2015, Iran’s state sponsorship of terrorism worldwide remained undiminished through the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps-Qods Force (IRGC-QF), its Ministry of Intelligence and Security, and Tehran’s ally Hizballah, which remained a significant threat to the stability of Lebanon and the broader region.”

Since Feingold first praised the Iran deal, the Obama Administration officials have admitted that a $400 million cash payment by the U.S. to Iran – something not disclosed as part of the broader Iran deal negotiations – was indeed “leverage” to secure the release of Iranian prisoners wanted by the U.S. “U.S. Concedes $400 Million Payment to Iran Was Delayed as Prisoner ‘Leverage’,” declared The New York Times in an August headline. The story went on to explain that in Iran the payment was being called a “ransom” by local press.

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) has pointed out that while the Obama administration refuses to call the payment a “ransom,” the aircraft that was to carry the released prisoners out of Iran was not allowed to leave until the aircraft carrying $400 million in cash arrived on the ground in the country.

Additional payments to Iran since January have brought total U.S. payments to the country to $1.7 billion since the year started.

Secretary of Defense Ash Carter and Gen. Joe Dunford, chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, both told a Senate committee last week that they were unaware of the payments to Iran and that neither the White House nor the State Department contacted them to let them know the payments were going to be made. “But Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry did not consult Secretary of Defense Ash Carter or the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Joseph Dunford,” Eli Lake of Bloomberg reported.                                                                                                             

On the heels of the payments organized by the State Department, the Treasury Department announced that it would allow airline sales between Boeing – a major defense contractor, Airbus – a European aircraft builder, and Iran to move ahead. “The United States has begun unblocking deals by Western giants to sell jetliners to Iran,” Reuters reported on September 21.

Not once since the repeated cash transfers or the news that a U.S. defense giant may sell aircraft to Iran has Feingold, who claims to support fiscal transparency, spoken up about the matter. Feingold has received at least $155,000 in contributions from the J Street PAC, a political entity that itself was paid over half a million to lobby in favor of the Iran deal.

On his campaign website, Feingold talks about fighting ISIS (even though he voted repeatedly to kill a key weapons system that has been used in that fight) but he doesn’t mention the Iran deal.

The remarkable silence may have something to do with Feingold being appointed to a key State Department post under Kerry by President Obama. In 2013, the former senator was named special envoy to the Great Lakes region of Africa and in that capacity shuttled back and forth between the State Department and various African nations in an attempt to represent U.S. interests in the region and encourage more stability.

Whether or not the Wisconsin media press the Iran issue with Feingold remains to be seen. His opponent, Sen. Ron Johnson (R) has vocally and repeatedly criticized the deal.

Feingold Violated FEC Regulations, Hit With Hefty Fine

In 1992, Russ Feingold asked Wisconsin voters to support him in part because he pledged to “rely on Wisconsin citizens, not out-of-staters, to pay for this campaign.” Since that first promise about campaign contributions, Sen. Feingold (D-WI) has made his opposition to money in politics central to his political identity. But the image of a down home political crusader intent on creating tougher campaign finance laws was threatened in 1999, when Feingold and his campaign were found to be in violation of Federal Election Commission reporting requirements.

According to FEC documents, Feingold’s campaign failed to properly report $54,726.73 in campaign contributions during the final weeks of the Senator’s 1998 re-election effort. The cash was split between 51 different contributions by individuals and political action committees. Feingold’s campaign was notified of the violations in October of 1999. The campaign responded by choosing to sign a so-called conciliation agreement, in which they admitted fault and wrongdoing and paid a civil penalty of $9,000.

“On November 23, 1999, the Federal Election Commission accepted the signed conciliation agreement and civil penalty submitted on behalf of Feingold Senate Committee,” a letter from the FEC to Feingold’s campaign reads.

Internal FEC documents related to the case bear the signature of Lois Lerner, the infamous IRS official who used her office to target and harass conservative organizations, including Media Trackers. Before going to work at the IRS, Lerner, a close personal friend of deposed former Wisconsin Government Accountability Board head Kevin Kennedy, spent some time as a lawyer working for the FEC.

The bi-partisan FEC had no qualms about unanimously recommending that the investigation into Feingold’s campaign finance troubles move ahead. The Commission voted 6-0 in favor of pursing Feingold after staff discovered glaring discrepancies between Feingold’s post election campaign cash report and his pre-election filings.

Ironically, just months before being caught by the FEC violating campaign finance laws, Feingold was awarded the John F. Kennedy Profile in Courage Award for his work with Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) in introducing McCain-Feingold, a landmark piece of legislation designed to put stringent restrictions on how political candidates raise and spend money. The bill eventually passed into law in 2002.

In his speech accepting the award, Feingold praised his 1998 re-election campaign as a model of transparency and limited political spending.

“As I was preparing to run for reelection in 1998, I was hoping to win and to return to much unfinished business for Wisconsin and the nation including my bipartisan efforts with John McCain to pass our bill. In the spirit of our legislation, I decided to voluntarily limit my spending in the manner that we hope will become the practice for all candidates,” Feingold declared.

The campaign cash crusader then went on to tout the success that came his way after his decision to limit his own campaign spending in that race.

“After I realized that my opposition was going to lake advantage of my voluntary spending limit by infusing millions of dollars of soft money into the race, I had to make another decision and that was whether to have my allies respond in kind. I simply decided I could not justify being reelected on that basis. But this was not an attempt at political suicide. I honestly believed that if I limited my spending, the people of Wisconsin would see what was happening and would take control. And they did.”

Fast-forward to 2010, when Feingold was ousted from office, and the ex-Senator proceeded to set up an outside spending group called Progressives United. While ostensibly existing to support like-minded candidates for office, the entity really served as a vehicle through which Feingold could keep old staff employed and lay the groundwork for yet another senate campaign in 2016.

Also during the 2016 race, Feingold was hit by the media for reversing his original pledge to raise the majority of his U.S. Senate campaign funds from inside of Wisconsin. “While many major Senate campaigns would brag about that ratio, it’s a reversal from the iconic in-state fundraising pledge that Feingold painted on his garage in a 1992 campaign ad,” a story by National Journal noted.

Whether or not Feingold’s double lifestyle of saying one thing about campaign finance but doing another for himself catches up to him is up to voters this fall.

Cross-posted from Media Trackers.

“Trustworthy” Hillary Clinton Deleted Benghazi Emails

Turns out that not all of the emails Secretary of State Hillary Clinton deleted from her private server dealt with yoga and dinner plans. Unless, that is, Clinton was doing yoga at a studio named Benghazi, or Benghazi was the name of some local fair-trade organic grocery store. The Associated Press reported Tuesday afternoon that lawyers with the State Department informed a federal judge that some 30 emails related to Benghazi were discovered among those that Clinton deleted from her private e-mail server. An undisclosed number of the emails were not turned over to federal investigators during their probe of Clinton’s creative email practices.

In a demonstration of just how slowly the government works, federal lawyers told the judge presiding over the email release case that it would be late September before they could redact any confidential/classified information from the 30 or so documents and release them to the public. The judge has urged them to shorten that timeline.

Remarkably, Democrats have not abandoned Clinton en masse since her self-inflicted email scandal first began. Once it became clear that the grouchy socialist from Vermont wasn’t going to clench the Democratic presidential nomination, the Democratic Party’s top candidates, officials and operatives fell in line behind the Clinton machine.

Among those Democrats who have backed Clinton is Wisconsin Sen. Russ Feingold, who is running this year to recapture his old Senate seat, which he lost in 2010 to Republican Sen. Ron Johnson. Asked about Clinton earlier this week, Feingold called her “reliable and trustworthy” and went on to say:

“What I’m saying is, it’s a whole other thing when somebody is the president of the United States. And that the highest level of scrutiny should be applied to something like that when somebody becomes president.”

Feingold has suggested that Clinton should divest herself of any ties to the controversial Clinton Foundation, and that he has said he is “troubled” by how Clinton used private email servers and addresses to circumvent State Department systems.

But despite being “troubled” by her inability to tell the truth about her email use, and despite his skepticism of the Clinton Foundation, Feingold still believes Hillary Clinton is “trustworthy.”

And Feingold’s not alone in his sentiments. Wisely, most Democrats don’t go as far Feingold, but they also don’t admit that Clinton’s behavior has been less than honest, candid or straightforward.

Democratic Congresswoman Ann Kirkpatrick of Arizona claimed she didn’t hear the question, and then proceeded to not answer the question, when she was asked on CNN in early August if she thought Clinton was “trustworthy.” In mid-August, Gov. Maggie Hassan (D-NH) was asked the same question by CNN, and after initially dodging, ended up saying, “I think that she has demonstrated a commitment always to something beyond herself, bigger than herself.”

An NBC poll found that only 12% of Democratic voters think Clinton is trustworthy. That’s even worse than Donald Trump, who is thought to be trustworthy by only 19% of Republicans.

With Donald Trump’s poll numbers riding so low and, likely, taking some Republicans down with him, it is unclear if Democrats like Feingold will face any negative consequences for their near lock-step support for Clinton despite the universal perception that she is a pathological liar who cannot tell the truth if it draws into question some element or aspect of her past or present judgment.

Feingold Wants GITMO Closed, Former Detainees Kill Americans

While Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI) has waged a comfortable war of words against the U.S. terrorist detention facility in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, former detainees of the GITMO prison have been killing Americans according to the Obama Administration. On Wednesday, the Washington Post reported that top administration officials are admitting that up to 12 former Guantanamo Bay detainees released from the prison have participated in or carried out numerous attacks on Americans. A total of at least six Americans – and likely more – have been killed in the attacks, including a female aid worker in Afghanistan.

According to the Post, news that at least a dozen terrorists had returned to the fight against Americans emerged in March, but details about their lethality on the battlefield were not confirmed until recently. All detainees were released during the George W. Bush Administration, but the wholesale release or relocation of GITMO residents has been supported by both President Barack Obama and Sen. Russ Feingold.

Feingold’s support for releasing some terrorist detainees and relocating others so they can be tried in civilian U.S. courts has been a hallmark of his foreign policy. The detention facility at Guantanamo Bay “is harming our ability to gain respect and cooperation of other nations, and I fear that it is giving the terrorists a potent recruiting tool,” the senator said in 2007.

Two years later, Feingold praised President Obama for pledging “to close Guantanamo, which is being used as a recruiting tool by our enemies” and said “I look forward to continuing to work with him to restore the rule of law and put in place policies that will keep America safe and reduce the threats to our country that have grown more challenging because of the missteps of the last administration.”

At a Senate hearing in 2009, Feingold said the time for closing the Guantanamo Bay detention facility was nearing, “I look forward to an open dialogue on these very difficult and important questions as the time for closing Guantanamo approaches.”

But away from Feingold’s theoretical railing against Guantanamo and hypothetical assertions that its mere existence made Americans less safe, real terrorists released from GITMO were returning to the fight against U.S. military personnel and U.S. allies.

In 2009 the Boston Globe reported that national security officials found that top Al Qaeda operatives were infiltrating Yemen in an attempt to further destabilize an already fragile country and establish a base of operations. The Globe reported:

“Several of the leading Al Qaeda figures now in Yemen were released from the US prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, including Ibrahaim Al Rubaish, one of the groups’ leading religious ideologues, who is affectionately known as the ‘poet of Guantanamo,’ according to militant videos broadcast on the Internet and considered authentic by US intelligence officials.”

Without any sense of irony, Feingold was quoted in the story complaining that the rise of Al Qaeda in Yemen was proof the Obama Administration wasn’t focusing on the right priorities in the Global War on Terror. The Globe reported:

“Senator Russ Feingold, a Wisconsin Democrat and a member of the Intelligence Committee, said he believes the Obama administration needs a far more global strategy to prevent Al Qaeda from taking root in Yemen and other failed states such as Somalia.

“‘We are making a very strategic error in the war against Al Qaeda,’ Feingold said in an interview, adding that applying US military and economic resources almost entirely to Afghanistan and Pakistan is a ‘fundamental misunderstanding’ of the threat.”

Feingold’s opposition to Guantanamo Bay has translated into several votes on the Senate floor. In 2009 he voted in favor of tabling an amendment to a defense-related spending bill that would have prohibited the construction of any facility in the U.S. or on U.S. territory that would have replaced GITMO. In October of that year Feingold voted against yet another defense spending bill that specifically prohibited the transfer of GITMO detainees to U.S. prisons unless Congress first approved of the plan. The bill also contained modest pay raises for service members.

In contrast to Feingold’s love affair with shutting down Guantanamo at all costs, Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI) has introduced legislation to require greater transparency should the facility ever be completely eliminated. Johnson wants the executive branch to notify Congress any time a Guantanamo detainee is released, where they are going, what their final destination is expected or intended to be, and an explanation for why that detainee is being released in that country, as well as an assessment of how many GITMO detainees released through that country have returned to the fight against U.S. or allied forces.

Feingold Disagrees With Admirals, Wants Fewer US Subs

Two-term Democratic Sen. Russ Feingold is desperate to get his old seat back in Wisconsin, and to that end he unveiled a policy plan that he calls “Fiscal Fitness.” According to his campaign, the plan is designed to show that Feingold is serious about cutting wasteful spending in Washington. But there’s a problem with the plan.

A big problem.

In his haste to contrive “savings” for taxpayers, Feingold calls for a reduction in the U.S. Navy’s submarine force. Specifically, Feingold wants the Navy to not replace some Ohio-class ballistic missile submarines as they retire from service. The powerful submarines represent a key part of the United State’s nuclear deterrence capability, a capability that has helped prevent a nuclear conflict.

According to the U.S. Navy, there are currently 14 Ohio-class submarines in service. They are the largest submarines in the fleet and they are getting old. Very old. In fact, by the time all Ohio-class boats retire, they will have been in service longer than any other submarines in U.S. history. Concerns about safety as well as aging technology have led the Navy to plan on replacing the 14 submarines with a fleet of 12 new subs.

In his “Fiscal Fitness” plan, Feingold mocks the Navy’s plan to build 12 new submarines, insisting there is no need to build that many replacement ships. “At present, 12 submarines are slated to be produced by 2042, but the United States could reconfigure the number of missiles deployed per submarine and produce 8 submarines instead,” the plan declares.

That’s not true, according to top Navy admirals. Last year, Rear Admiral Joseph Tofalo was asked by a reporter about a plan by some Senate Democrats to reduce the number of submarines used to replace the old Ohio-class boats. The concept is identical to what Feingold is proposing in his “Fiscal Fitness” plan.

“We have to cover two oceans at once and all of the targets that go with each of these oceans,” Tofalo said before explaining that the absolute minimum number of nuclear missile subs needed is 10 – not the 8 that Feingold claims would do the job. ” The combatant commander says that number is ten, ten operational SSBNs,” the admiral said. “Eight just wouldn’t do it.”

Also last year, Vice Admiral Terry Benedict, who leads the Navy’s strategic systems programs, emphasized that the service needs all 12 replacement submarines. “Anything below the current authorized number of boats for the Ohio replacement will prevent us from meeting our national commitment requirements. We simply can’t do it,” he told a gathering of professionals.

This isn’t the first time that Feingold has blundered on defense policy. In the same plan he calls for the military to acquire more F/A-18 Super Hornets even though he repeatedly waged war on that very airplane when the military was trying to buy them in the late 1990s. On multiple occasions Feingold introduced legislation or floor amendments in the Senate that specifically called for the Super Hornet program to be cancelled.

Judging from what experts say about key defense issues, Feingold’s “Fiscal Fitness” plan appears to be election year posturing that’s just bad policy.