As a public service, we offer you another post from The Stranger's blog, with a full list of all the contenders for the vacant Seattle City Council seat.
They also repeat some early name-dropping of "leading contenders". My only question: "Where's Goldy?" He told me he actually sent his letter in and received the following response from someone at City Hall: "Are you serious?" I hope he didn't say "No."
Reader Advisory: Looking at the list you may experience political vertigo as your eyes absorb the millions of megabytes of Seattle political history that the cumulative list of names provokes in your brain. The only name missing: Dick Falkenbury.
Sunday, January 08, 2006
QUOTE OF THE DAY
"Indeed, while Gregoire may not be doing so well in the eyes of the general public, she's winning high marks from the political establishment, especially big business, labor and environmental leaders. Some even suggest she accomplished as much in her first year as former Gov. Gary Locke did in two full terms.
After last year's legislative session, lawmakers from both parties described her as far more engaged than Locke — a better listener, more decisive and better at making it clear where she stands on issues."-buried in the story in today's Seattle Times, "2004 election controversy still hounds Gregoire."
I'm always happy when the "traditional press" shares an opinion that I previously expressed here.
After last year's legislative session, lawmakers from both parties described her as far more engaged than Locke — a better listener, more decisive and better at making it clear where she stands on issues."-buried in the story in today's Seattle Times, "2004 election controversy still hounds Gregoire."
I'm always happy when the "traditional press" shares an opinion that I previously expressed here.
''Seattle Wants Out of Iraq''
"A stellar list of speakers highlighted today’s event in the filled-to-capacity Seattle Labor Temple. US Congress members Jim McDermott and Jay Inslee, Bert Sacks, and two representatives of Military Families Speak Out led off a high-energy afternoon co-sponsored by Progressive Democrats of America and the Backbone Campaign. Also partnering were Code Pink, the Majority Visibility Project, and Veterans for Peace.
When asked why he was participating in this event, Rep. McDermott answered, “I think this war will be brought to a halt by people making themselves heard. It is incumbent on us as public officials to support and encourage this sort of thing. Vietnam didn’t end because the government decided it wasn’t working. It ended because of people exercising their right to free speech.”
Asked the same question, Rep. Inslee answered, “We lost 11 of our best yesterday. Today we are here to demand action by Congress to return Iraq to the Iraqis.”
Tagged by war proponents “Baghdad Jim” after a pre-war trip to Iraq to assess the reality of the situation, McDermott has been an outspoken opponent of the invasion of Iraq from the beginning. McDermott spoke forcefully about the absolute necessity of winning back Democratic Congressional seats from all over the country. (Helping to illustrate the point, Darcy Burner, (www.darcyburner.com). who is running to oppose Republican Dave Reichert in Washington’s 8th District, was in attendance. An advocate for Congress asking the hard questions in holding this administration responsible for the lies leading up to the Iraq war, Darcy is an excellent candidate who would be happy for the help of anyone reading this who resides in Bellevue, Mercer Island, and eastern Pierce and King counties.)
McDermott recalled being on Crossfire before the invasion began. He asked the general appearing with him what will happen if the war “goes bad.” The general answered that the military leadership would make “a quiet visit to the White House and say it was time to go.” According to McDermott, Congressman John Murtha’s call for withdrawal in late 2005 was the result of such a visit from the generals.
McDermott believes that, as big and as serious an issue as the war is, an even bigger issue is that freedom and democracy are at risk. This excessively secretive administration wants to silence all dissent. “They want one party, one country, one voice—THEIRS.” He feels we need two exit strategies—one for Iraq and one for getting rid of this administration. He believes that the only adequate response is to investigate the means of impeachment.
He concluded by saying that “there is a tide moving that will bring our people into Congress. That’s how we’ll prevail.”
Rep. Inslee hosted the public event in his home district at which Ambassador Joseph Wilson was quoted as saying he was looking forward to “Karl Rove being frog-marched out of the White House.” (This correspondent was privileged to have been at that event.) Inslee began his speech by saying, “I don’t have the exact definition of ‘frog-march’, but we’ll know it when we see it.”
Before discussing the war, Inslee first reminded us of three positive things that we accomplished in 2005:
1) We drove a stake through the heart of the effort to destroy Social Security
2) We beat down the attempt to drill for oil in the Arctic Refuge
3) We helped him to pass an provision against domestic violence
Instrumental in organizing two-thirds of the Democrat House members to vote against the invasion of Iraq, Inslee believes our country will be made stronger by withdrawing our troops from Iraq. We will be stronger because our pre-eminence in speaking up for democracy and human rights around the world will be restored. We cannot advocate for freedom if we are not speaking from a position of moral strength. He also spoke strongly for stopping this administration from spying on Americans.
Inslee listed things that we can do right now to bring our troops home:
1) We need to pass the Apollo Energy Project, his prime legislative project, to break our addiction to oil, to stop global warming, and to grow jobs in the US. He added that Harry Reid, the House Minority Leader, has said that energy independence must become a major part of the Democratic Party platform.
2) We must replace the people who voted for the war.
Bert Sacks, an activist with Physicians for Social Responsibility, began bringing medicines to Iraq during the embargo started in 1991 under the Clinton administration. His efforts led to US government action against him and a $10,000 fine. He said that the Iraqi people have felt under attack by the US for 15 years. Over one-half million children died of hunger, dehydration, and preventable disease during the years of the embargo. For that reason, he believes that the changes we need to make must go beyond the removal of the Bush administration. It must go beyond electing Democrats to an awareness of what kind of country we truly want to be in the long term. We are horrified at dozens of death each day by suicide bombers, but where is the horror at the deaths of 195 children a day under a cruel embargo? Destruction of water and electric systems are in effect acts of biowarfare because of their known results.
Stacy Bannerman, Board Member of Military Families Speak Out (MFSO), author of When the War Came Home, made an impassioned appeal for advocacy for returning veterans and their families. An unprecedented percentage of National Guard and Reserve troops are in need of psychological counseling. At least 50 percent have lost jobs due to their deployment and many must now deal with being deeply in debt. Rates of post-traumatic stress disorder are estimated to be as high as 90 percent.
Judy Linnehan, also of MFSO, shared her experiences at the Global International Peace Conference in London. Of 1200 delegates, 40 were from the US. Among these were Cindy Sheehan, David Swanson, Steve Cobble, and Medea Benjamin. The presence of the US delegation was a source of hope to those from other countries.
The group then split into four breakout groups to discuss how to monitor the media for war coverage, public and direct actions against the war, legislative action, and how to meet the needs of returning vets.
Three poster-size letters were available to be signed by attendees. These were to be posted at the corporate offices of the local television stations, asking them to report on the activities of the administration and the events in Iraq with honesty; to be responsible citizens. The group then marched through the streets of Seattle to the stations in the immediate neighborhood and presented these letters.
THE AFTERNOON WAS GREAT. Thanks a thousand-fold to all who organized it."-from the post by Rita Weinstein on AfterDowningStreet.org. There are also posts there from around the country about yesterday's events.
When asked why he was participating in this event, Rep. McDermott answered, “I think this war will be brought to a halt by people making themselves heard. It is incumbent on us as public officials to support and encourage this sort of thing. Vietnam didn’t end because the government decided it wasn’t working. It ended because of people exercising their right to free speech.”
Asked the same question, Rep. Inslee answered, “We lost 11 of our best yesterday. Today we are here to demand action by Congress to return Iraq to the Iraqis.”
Tagged by war proponents “Baghdad Jim” after a pre-war trip to Iraq to assess the reality of the situation, McDermott has been an outspoken opponent of the invasion of Iraq from the beginning. McDermott spoke forcefully about the absolute necessity of winning back Democratic Congressional seats from all over the country. (Helping to illustrate the point, Darcy Burner, (www.darcyburner.com). who is running to oppose Republican Dave Reichert in Washington’s 8th District, was in attendance. An advocate for Congress asking the hard questions in holding this administration responsible for the lies leading up to the Iraq war, Darcy is an excellent candidate who would be happy for the help of anyone reading this who resides in Bellevue, Mercer Island, and eastern Pierce and King counties.)
McDermott recalled being on Crossfire before the invasion began. He asked the general appearing with him what will happen if the war “goes bad.” The general answered that the military leadership would make “a quiet visit to the White House and say it was time to go.” According to McDermott, Congressman John Murtha’s call for withdrawal in late 2005 was the result of such a visit from the generals.
McDermott believes that, as big and as serious an issue as the war is, an even bigger issue is that freedom and democracy are at risk. This excessively secretive administration wants to silence all dissent. “They want one party, one country, one voice—THEIRS.” He feels we need two exit strategies—one for Iraq and one for getting rid of this administration. He believes that the only adequate response is to investigate the means of impeachment.
He concluded by saying that “there is a tide moving that will bring our people into Congress. That’s how we’ll prevail.”
Rep. Inslee hosted the public event in his home district at which Ambassador Joseph Wilson was quoted as saying he was looking forward to “Karl Rove being frog-marched out of the White House.” (This correspondent was privileged to have been at that event.) Inslee began his speech by saying, “I don’t have the exact definition of ‘frog-march’, but we’ll know it when we see it.”
Before discussing the war, Inslee first reminded us of three positive things that we accomplished in 2005:
1) We drove a stake through the heart of the effort to destroy Social Security
2) We beat down the attempt to drill for oil in the Arctic Refuge
3) We helped him to pass an provision against domestic violence
Instrumental in organizing two-thirds of the Democrat House members to vote against the invasion of Iraq, Inslee believes our country will be made stronger by withdrawing our troops from Iraq. We will be stronger because our pre-eminence in speaking up for democracy and human rights around the world will be restored. We cannot advocate for freedom if we are not speaking from a position of moral strength. He also spoke strongly for stopping this administration from spying on Americans.
Inslee listed things that we can do right now to bring our troops home:
1) We need to pass the Apollo Energy Project, his prime legislative project, to break our addiction to oil, to stop global warming, and to grow jobs in the US. He added that Harry Reid, the House Minority Leader, has said that energy independence must become a major part of the Democratic Party platform.
2) We must replace the people who voted for the war.
Bert Sacks, an activist with Physicians for Social Responsibility, began bringing medicines to Iraq during the embargo started in 1991 under the Clinton administration. His efforts led to US government action against him and a $10,000 fine. He said that the Iraqi people have felt under attack by the US for 15 years. Over one-half million children died of hunger, dehydration, and preventable disease during the years of the embargo. For that reason, he believes that the changes we need to make must go beyond the removal of the Bush administration. It must go beyond electing Democrats to an awareness of what kind of country we truly want to be in the long term. We are horrified at dozens of death each day by suicide bombers, but where is the horror at the deaths of 195 children a day under a cruel embargo? Destruction of water and electric systems are in effect acts of biowarfare because of their known results.
Stacy Bannerman, Board Member of Military Families Speak Out (MFSO), author of When the War Came Home, made an impassioned appeal for advocacy for returning veterans and their families. An unprecedented percentage of National Guard and Reserve troops are in need of psychological counseling. At least 50 percent have lost jobs due to their deployment and many must now deal with being deeply in debt. Rates of post-traumatic stress disorder are estimated to be as high as 90 percent.
Judy Linnehan, also of MFSO, shared her experiences at the Global International Peace Conference in London. Of 1200 delegates, 40 were from the US. Among these were Cindy Sheehan, David Swanson, Steve Cobble, and Medea Benjamin. The presence of the US delegation was a source of hope to those from other countries.
The group then split into four breakout groups to discuss how to monitor the media for war coverage, public and direct actions against the war, legislative action, and how to meet the needs of returning vets.
Three poster-size letters were available to be signed by attendees. These were to be posted at the corporate offices of the local television stations, asking them to report on the activities of the administration and the events in Iraq with honesty; to be responsible citizens. The group then marched through the streets of Seattle to the stations in the immediate neighborhood and presented these letters.
THE AFTERNOON WAS GREAT. Thanks a thousand-fold to all who organized it."-from the post by Rita Weinstein on AfterDowningStreet.org. There are also posts there from around the country about yesterday's events.
Saturday, January 07, 2006
''Poll: Public Uneasy With GOP Leadership''
"Dissatisfied with the nation's direction, Americans are leaning toward wanting a change in which political party leads Congress — preferring that Democrats take control, an AP-Ipsos poll found. Democrats are favored over Republicans 49 percent to 36 percent.
The polling came as disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff pleaded guilty to tax evasion, fraud and corruption charges and agreed to aid a federal investigation of members of Congress and other government officials.
President Bush's job approval remains low — 40 percent in the AP-Ipsos poll, with only one-third saying the country is headed in the right direction. Bush also remains low on his handling of Iraq, where violence against Iraqis and U.S. troops has been surging.
"I just don't like the direction our country is going in," said Steve Brown, a political independent from Olympia, Wash. "I think a balance of power would be beneficial right now."
Republicans are watching the situation unfold with some nervousness.
"I don't think anyone is hitting the panic button," said Rich Bond, a former Republican National Committee chairman. "But there is an acute recognition of the grim environment that both parties are operating in."
"If the Democrats had any leadership or any message, they could be poised for a good year," Bond said. "But in the absence of that, they have not been able to capitalize on Republican woes. Because of the size of the GOP majority, Democrats have to run the board, and I don't see that happening."
The public's unease with Republican leadership in the White House and Congress creates a favorable environment for Democrats, said Democratic consultant Dane Strother.
"The problem is you don't vote for a party," Strother said. "You're voting for a member of Congress. And we're a year away" from the midterm elections.
About a third of the public, 34 percent, approves of the job Congress is doing, and nearly twice as many — 63 percent — disapprove, according to the poll of 1,001 adults taken Jan. 3-5. The margin of sampling error was plus or minus 3 percentage points. Public opinion of both Democrats and Republicans in Congress has been mixed, recent polling found.
"Neither one of the parties has done a very good job so far," said Cristal Mills, a political independent from Los Angeles. "They get away with murder, they get paid to pass certain things. It's the good ol' boy syndrome."
In the Senate, 33 seats will be on the ballot in November, 17 of them currently in Democratic hands, 15 controlled by Republicans, and one held by Sen. James Jeffords, a Vermont independent. Democrats now have 44 Senate seats, and need to pick up seven to gain a majority, six if Vermont independent Bernie Sanders replaces Jeffords.
All 435 House seats are on the ballot this fall, and Democrats need to gain at least 15 to become the majority party and take control of the House.
While many House races are noncompetitive, Republican strategists fear that fallout from the Abramoff scandal will give Democrats fresh opportunity for gains. But they dismiss suggestions that Democrats could take control of the House.
Republicans became the dominant party in the House in 1994, when the GOP picked up more than 50 seats held by Democrats. In that midterm election, Democrats won four open seats that previously were held by the GOP.
Carl Forti, a spokesman for the GOP's congressional campaign committee, said about 30 House seats are competitive this year, compared with more than 100 a dozen years ago. Rep. Rahm Emanuel of Illinois, who heads the Democrats' campaign efforts, put the competitive number in 2006 at 42, and he suggested ongoing scandals improve Democratic recruitment of candidates by "making the environment more conducive. It helps move them along in the process."
Some say they want new leadership in Congress because of strong dissatisfaction with current policies.
"I get the strange feeling that we're being sold down the river," said Paul Oulton, an independent from San Ramon, Calif. "We may be in line for some very severe financial problems.
"Give me somebody conservative with common sense. There's too much left and too much right. Give me somebody in the middle of the road."-from the AP story.
On a similar note, Nancy Pelosi had this reaction to Tom DeLay's decision to abandon his bid to reclaim his post as majority leader: ""For years, at the expense of the American people, the House Republicans have enabled and benefited from the Republican culture of corruption engineered by Tom DeLay. The culture of corruption is so pervasive in the Republican conference that a single person stepping down is not nearly enough to clean up the Republican Congress." -from the AP story.
The polling came as disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff pleaded guilty to tax evasion, fraud and corruption charges and agreed to aid a federal investigation of members of Congress and other government officials.
President Bush's job approval remains low — 40 percent in the AP-Ipsos poll, with only one-third saying the country is headed in the right direction. Bush also remains low on his handling of Iraq, where violence against Iraqis and U.S. troops has been surging.
"I just don't like the direction our country is going in," said Steve Brown, a political independent from Olympia, Wash. "I think a balance of power would be beneficial right now."
Republicans are watching the situation unfold with some nervousness.
"I don't think anyone is hitting the panic button," said Rich Bond, a former Republican National Committee chairman. "But there is an acute recognition of the grim environment that both parties are operating in."
"If the Democrats had any leadership or any message, they could be poised for a good year," Bond said. "But in the absence of that, they have not been able to capitalize on Republican woes. Because of the size of the GOP majority, Democrats have to run the board, and I don't see that happening."
The public's unease with Republican leadership in the White House and Congress creates a favorable environment for Democrats, said Democratic consultant Dane Strother.
"The problem is you don't vote for a party," Strother said. "You're voting for a member of Congress. And we're a year away" from the midterm elections.
About a third of the public, 34 percent, approves of the job Congress is doing, and nearly twice as many — 63 percent — disapprove, according to the poll of 1,001 adults taken Jan. 3-5. The margin of sampling error was plus or minus 3 percentage points. Public opinion of both Democrats and Republicans in Congress has been mixed, recent polling found.
"Neither one of the parties has done a very good job so far," said Cristal Mills, a political independent from Los Angeles. "They get away with murder, they get paid to pass certain things. It's the good ol' boy syndrome."
In the Senate, 33 seats will be on the ballot in November, 17 of them currently in Democratic hands, 15 controlled by Republicans, and one held by Sen. James Jeffords, a Vermont independent. Democrats now have 44 Senate seats, and need to pick up seven to gain a majority, six if Vermont independent Bernie Sanders replaces Jeffords.
All 435 House seats are on the ballot this fall, and Democrats need to gain at least 15 to become the majority party and take control of the House.
While many House races are noncompetitive, Republican strategists fear that fallout from the Abramoff scandal will give Democrats fresh opportunity for gains. But they dismiss suggestions that Democrats could take control of the House.
Republicans became the dominant party in the House in 1994, when the GOP picked up more than 50 seats held by Democrats. In that midterm election, Democrats won four open seats that previously were held by the GOP.
Carl Forti, a spokesman for the GOP's congressional campaign committee, said about 30 House seats are competitive this year, compared with more than 100 a dozen years ago. Rep. Rahm Emanuel of Illinois, who heads the Democrats' campaign efforts, put the competitive number in 2006 at 42, and he suggested ongoing scandals improve Democratic recruitment of candidates by "making the environment more conducive. It helps move them along in the process."
Some say they want new leadership in Congress because of strong dissatisfaction with current policies.
"I get the strange feeling that we're being sold down the river," said Paul Oulton, an independent from San Ramon, Calif. "We may be in line for some very severe financial problems.
"Give me somebody conservative with common sense. There's too much left and too much right. Give me somebody in the middle of the road."-from the AP story.
On a similar note, Nancy Pelosi had this reaction to Tom DeLay's decision to abandon his bid to reclaim his post as majority leader: ""For years, at the expense of the American people, the House Republicans have enabled and benefited from the Republican culture of corruption engineered by Tom DeLay. The culture of corruption is so pervasive in the Republican conference that a single person stepping down is not nearly enough to clean up the Republican Congress." -from the AP story.
''Northwest Blog-o-rama!'' (UPDATED)
"I'm here at the first-ever, full-on gathering of Pacific Northwest bloggers in Olympia, Washington. Today's session - held in the shadow of the state capitol dome - was marked by stories of how Washington-state bloggers helped defeat the evil Measure 912 (which aimed to gut Gov. Christine Gregoire's transportation improvement package) and influenced last fall's King County Executive race. Tomorrow, we'll be reconvening to talk about how bloggers can help advance progressive causes and candidates across the Northwest this year.
Lawmakers are getting into the act, too. State Representative Deb Wallace of the Vancouver area described how, although current (and outdated, perchance?) ethics rules prevent state lawmakers from running interactive blogs, she plans to launch an independent one of her own this session: Wallace & BlogIt. Wallace is shown at left with Mark Varadian, webmaster for the state Senate Democratic caucus. (For some more photos, click here).
And here's my "smal world" story: As you know, last week Red State Rebels won one of the first Dave Neiwert Awards given by the Northwest Progressive Institute to recognize the region's best, most active blogs. I met Dave today, and it turns out I'd met him before, when he and his sister-in-law Barb happened to be cycling over Idaho's Galena Summit when my husband Bruce and I were up there. We stood up there a good long time, swapping stories from the newspaper business. Dave figures this was circa 1989 or 1990. He has since gone on to write a bunch of books, as well as the groundreaking blog Orcinus, not to mention having the NPI's awards named after him."-from the post on Red State Rebels. Here are photos of some of us who were there.
Update: John Feit, writing on The Stranger's blog, Slog, has a somewhat less enthusiastic perspective:
"Yesterday afternoon, the Friday afternoon before the 2006 legislative session was set to begin (it starts on Monday), a gang of Democratic bloggers, including blogging BMOC David Goldstein of HorsesAss, held a symposium in Olympia to school Democrats about the local lefty blogosphere and how to use it.
The conference—organized by 18-year-old blogger Andrew Villeneuve, chair of his own grassroots project, the Northwest Progressive Institute, and Lynn Allen from Evergreen Politics blog —was held in a hearing room in the Capitol building and drew about 30 folks.
Two Democratic Reps —Zach Hudgins from the 11th (South Seattle, Burien, SeaTac, Renton) and Deb Wallace from the 17th (Vancouver) showed up—as did Gov. Gregoire's new communications director, Holly Armstrong. Also on hand: lots of staffers for Democratic legislators. Mostly, though, the room was packed with bloggers.
It was a pretty self-congratulatory session, with, for example, Goldstein explaining how his "David Irons Hits His Mom" story provided a devestating left hook to the suddenly surging Irons. (Our own SLOG got props from Washblog's Ray Minchew, who credited us for the Lori Sotelo voter challenge story.)
Basically, though, the bloggers' advice to the Democratic Party was simple: Leak your stories to the bloggers first. The partisan bloggers will run with your speaking points, create a buzz, and force the media to pick up on it.
Ironically, I thought the best advice of the day concerned a comparatively archaic technology: Radio. Michael Hood, whose blog,Blatherwatch, monitors the right-wing talk radio shows, advised Democratic politicians to go on right-wing radio every chance they get. Democrats, Hood explained, make the mistake of blowing off right-wing radio because they think either, they won't get a fair shake or that the audience won't be receptive to their message. Hood said that while the callers will be hostile, the hosts are courteous, and there are tons of independent voters tuning in. The producers put the combative callers on the air because it makes for better radio, but ultimately, it's another chance to get your message out. When Ds make the mistake of not going on, Hood said, the Dems just look like sissies. And bottom line: The Democratic POV just gets bashed. Hood's advice: Get on and bash back."
Update II: Goldy chimes in with his post, "Bloggers of the NW unite."
Lawmakers are getting into the act, too. State Representative Deb Wallace of the Vancouver area described how, although current (and outdated, perchance?) ethics rules prevent state lawmakers from running interactive blogs, she plans to launch an independent one of her own this session: Wallace & BlogIt. Wallace is shown at left with Mark Varadian, webmaster for the state Senate Democratic caucus. (For some more photos, click here).
And here's my "smal world" story: As you know, last week Red State Rebels won one of the first Dave Neiwert Awards given by the Northwest Progressive Institute to recognize the region's best, most active blogs. I met Dave today, and it turns out I'd met him before, when he and his sister-in-law Barb happened to be cycling over Idaho's Galena Summit when my husband Bruce and I were up there. We stood up there a good long time, swapping stories from the newspaper business. Dave figures this was circa 1989 or 1990. He has since gone on to write a bunch of books, as well as the groundreaking blog Orcinus, not to mention having the NPI's awards named after him."-from the post on Red State Rebels. Here are photos of some of us who were there.
Update: John Feit, writing on The Stranger's blog, Slog, has a somewhat less enthusiastic perspective:
"Yesterday afternoon, the Friday afternoon before the 2006 legislative session was set to begin (it starts on Monday), a gang of Democratic bloggers, including blogging BMOC David Goldstein of HorsesAss, held a symposium in Olympia to school Democrats about the local lefty blogosphere and how to use it.
The conference—organized by 18-year-old blogger Andrew Villeneuve, chair of his own grassroots project, the Northwest Progressive Institute, and Lynn Allen from Evergreen Politics blog —was held in a hearing room in the Capitol building and drew about 30 folks.
Two Democratic Reps —Zach Hudgins from the 11th (South Seattle, Burien, SeaTac, Renton) and Deb Wallace from the 17th (Vancouver) showed up—as did Gov. Gregoire's new communications director, Holly Armstrong. Also on hand: lots of staffers for Democratic legislators. Mostly, though, the room was packed with bloggers.
It was a pretty self-congratulatory session, with, for example, Goldstein explaining how his "David Irons Hits His Mom" story provided a devestating left hook to the suddenly surging Irons. (Our own SLOG got props from Washblog's Ray Minchew, who credited us for the Lori Sotelo voter challenge story.)
Basically, though, the bloggers' advice to the Democratic Party was simple: Leak your stories to the bloggers first. The partisan bloggers will run with your speaking points, create a buzz, and force the media to pick up on it.
Ironically, I thought the best advice of the day concerned a comparatively archaic technology: Radio. Michael Hood, whose blog,Blatherwatch, monitors the right-wing talk radio shows, advised Democratic politicians to go on right-wing radio every chance they get. Democrats, Hood explained, make the mistake of blowing off right-wing radio because they think either, they won't get a fair shake or that the audience won't be receptive to their message. Hood said that while the callers will be hostile, the hosts are courteous, and there are tons of independent voters tuning in. The producers put the combative callers on the air because it makes for better radio, but ultimately, it's another chance to get your message out. When Ds make the mistake of not going on, Hood said, the Dems just look like sissies. And bottom line: The Democratic POV just gets bashed. Hood's advice: Get on and bash back."
Update II: Goldy chimes in with his post, "Bloggers of the NW unite."
''Got Impeachment?'' w/poll
"People here know that I have written on impeachment, both the historical and political reasons for it. People may know that if there were a compass that points at legitimacy, it would point straight at me. Legitimacy is the issue that Democracies must face. Without the faith by an overwhelming segment of the population in the integrity and legitimacy of the government, there is no government. The Declaration of Independence declares that legitimacy is the issue that Americans set their division from the mother country on.
Within the Democratic Party there is an argument over whether support for impeachment will marginalize the party. It will not, but it has to be handled the right way.
For the time being impeachment is more than a protest, but less than a reality. It is a goal, and it is a statement. It states to one's fellow Americans and the world that George Bush does not represent an acceptable range of American politics. Instead, he is outside the acceptable cone of executive action. Impeachment is a sign that we have rejected what he stands for. Even more so when coming in contrast to the impeachment of William Jefferson Clinton on charges which were concocted in what Joe Conanson rightly calls "the hunting of the president".
However, politics is not just personal politics, but party politics. And for the time being, it is not yet ripe for the party to support impeachment, nor even for every candidate to support impeachment. Instead the key point which the party must support is investigation. DeLay, Downing Street, Spygate, Treasongate and Abramoff demand no less than an exposure of the corrupt means by which the Republican holds power - these means are the K Street tentacle of a goptopus that has reached into the ballot box, into the tax code, into the bedrooms of Americans, into the phone conversations and emails - to attempt to strangle in the cradle any effective dissent.
The Democratic Party, as much as I might like it to, cannot yet come to the microphone, as a party, and say: "It is time to impeach" for the simple reason that there is not enough soot blackening the Republicans. People need to know, not just the facts, but the details, they need to feel those details come in battalions. With criminal charges flying they will hear them, they will come to understand that the Republican apparatus depends on bribery to hold its power in place. We know there is smoke, but impeachment is the hose to put out the fire. And Americans will believe in that fire when they see it on the evening news.
But individual Democratic office holders have started to come forward, and more and more need to come forward, one at a time, phrasing it in hypotheticals that polling shows that the country all ready supports. It is time to put pressure on those who are bubbling under on impeachment, to boil over, and say to the public what they say in private: that Bush represents an unacceptable abuse of power, that the culture of corruption must come to an end, and that the American people have said "enough is enough" to a illegitimate executive branch.
The historical backdrop of impeachment is this: of the big 4 - Tyler, Andrew Johnson, Nixon, Clinton - who have reached the point of a vote on the floor, only once has the party bringing impeachment lost congress in the next election - and that was the Whig civil war over Tyler. Of the big four - only in the case of Tyler has the party bringing impeachment lost the next Presidential election. Again, the whig civil war over Tyler.
Of the 9 time impeachment charges were filed, only twice has the party filing charges lost the next Presidential election - Reagan being the only other serious impeachment target that passed power on. Of the 9 times there has been a serious effort to impeach, only twice has the impeaching party lost Congress - The Republicans against Truman being the only other case.
In short, while politics is uncertain, impeaching an unpopular executive is as good a bet as you get.
But to get there, one must have a majority in the house, for this there is no substitute. While Senators may decide to support or not at the present time at their leisure, the house is the place where there must be a gathering pressure for investigation of a corrupt executive. The House is the people's body, and it should reflect the will of the people as it can be ascertained. That will is towards rejection of a President who has promised much, and delivered little.
There is, also a final important reason for the movement to impeach to spread, and that is history in the other direction - not looking back at history for clues as to our future, but the future looking back upon us as history. Over and over again, when moments came to oppose Bush and his illegal siezures of power, the people and the representatives of those people have failed to act with sufficient unity and decisiveness. In two successive elections the public ratified a party that they did not want in power. In key decisions the supreme court has ratified the actions of the executive. In war votes and budget votes, the house and senate have bent to his will, even when every reasoning individual knew the actions were folly.
If we are to recover our dignity to that future, we must draw, for now and always, a line in the sand. We are already hypocrites in the histories to be written, having casually supported an impeachment over a sex scandal, and then stood idly by while high crimes and misdemeanors were committed. We have watched in stupification as a gigantic debt has been piled up, and the retirement of the future squandered on pretty explosions for CNN to film. This is our last, our very last chance to set a mark in the future, and prove that were are not merely vegitation that grows on couches and is plucked from the ground - that we are not pommes de terror.
Several other diarists here agitate for visibility in impeachment. I join them in this, and have recommended these diaries when I have seen them. But there is a need for a more cogent, literary, and eloquent form of agitation for impeachment - not merely quoting Republicans in their overblown rhetoric on Clinton, though it has a satisfying element of turn about - but in connect each and every scandal to the out of control nature of the Republican Party. Resolve that, each and every time you write about Abramoff, DeLay, Plame or any other aspect of the goptopus, to mention the need for investigation, and the possibility of impeachment as being acceptable if that is where the evidence leads.
Because we know that Bush has left a trail of crumbs behind him, and we all know where the evidence leads.
Behind this is the need to cohere a larger legitimacy movement - instead of individual issues, such as the sanctity of the ballot box, such as clean elections, such as an end to warrantless searches and tortured interpretations of the law in support of torture - there is one larger issue: the leaders of this government, having failed to provide life, liberty and ample room to pursue happiness, have violated the fundamental social contract. They have used bribery and corruption to cover that fundamental failure. This lost of legitimacy is reflected in a public mood that rises and falls with the price of gasoline and the availability of jobs.
We have become like shocked survivors of a shipwreck, clinging to the rocks. Impeachment is the first step to reasserting that most fundamental truth, that legitimacy of government is all, and a goverment which has lost this, has nothing else but temporary power granted by unwarranted tenure.
Thus the voice of the party, that is its writers, activists, supporters and every day rank and file, must provide political cover with a barrage. This way the faces of the party - elected officials - have room to push harder. By creating a backdrop of just screaming outrage, but logical, consistent and insistent demands for investigation into what smells and impeachment of what stinks - it will both draw in those who are wavering farther up the party, and give cover to many who would love to vote "Yea" on articles of impeachment, but can only do so when there is a Speaker Pelosi to gavel them into order."-Stirling Newberry on Kos.
Within the Democratic Party there is an argument over whether support for impeachment will marginalize the party. It will not, but it has to be handled the right way.
For the time being impeachment is more than a protest, but less than a reality. It is a goal, and it is a statement. It states to one's fellow Americans and the world that George Bush does not represent an acceptable range of American politics. Instead, he is outside the acceptable cone of executive action. Impeachment is a sign that we have rejected what he stands for. Even more so when coming in contrast to the impeachment of William Jefferson Clinton on charges which were concocted in what Joe Conanson rightly calls "the hunting of the president".
However, politics is not just personal politics, but party politics. And for the time being, it is not yet ripe for the party to support impeachment, nor even for every candidate to support impeachment. Instead the key point which the party must support is investigation. DeLay, Downing Street, Spygate, Treasongate and Abramoff demand no less than an exposure of the corrupt means by which the Republican holds power - these means are the K Street tentacle of a goptopus that has reached into the ballot box, into the tax code, into the bedrooms of Americans, into the phone conversations and emails - to attempt to strangle in the cradle any effective dissent.
The Democratic Party, as much as I might like it to, cannot yet come to the microphone, as a party, and say: "It is time to impeach" for the simple reason that there is not enough soot blackening the Republicans. People need to know, not just the facts, but the details, they need to feel those details come in battalions. With criminal charges flying they will hear them, they will come to understand that the Republican apparatus depends on bribery to hold its power in place. We know there is smoke, but impeachment is the hose to put out the fire. And Americans will believe in that fire when they see it on the evening news.
But individual Democratic office holders have started to come forward, and more and more need to come forward, one at a time, phrasing it in hypotheticals that polling shows that the country all ready supports. It is time to put pressure on those who are bubbling under on impeachment, to boil over, and say to the public what they say in private: that Bush represents an unacceptable abuse of power, that the culture of corruption must come to an end, and that the American people have said "enough is enough" to a illegitimate executive branch.
The historical backdrop of impeachment is this: of the big 4 - Tyler, Andrew Johnson, Nixon, Clinton - who have reached the point of a vote on the floor, only once has the party bringing impeachment lost congress in the next election - and that was the Whig civil war over Tyler. Of the big four - only in the case of Tyler has the party bringing impeachment lost the next Presidential election. Again, the whig civil war over Tyler.
Of the 9 time impeachment charges were filed, only twice has the party filing charges lost the next Presidential election - Reagan being the only other serious impeachment target that passed power on. Of the 9 times there has been a serious effort to impeach, only twice has the impeaching party lost Congress - The Republicans against Truman being the only other case.
In short, while politics is uncertain, impeaching an unpopular executive is as good a bet as you get.
But to get there, one must have a majority in the house, for this there is no substitute. While Senators may decide to support or not at the present time at their leisure, the house is the place where there must be a gathering pressure for investigation of a corrupt executive. The House is the people's body, and it should reflect the will of the people as it can be ascertained. That will is towards rejection of a President who has promised much, and delivered little.
There is, also a final important reason for the movement to impeach to spread, and that is history in the other direction - not looking back at history for clues as to our future, but the future looking back upon us as history. Over and over again, when moments came to oppose Bush and his illegal siezures of power, the people and the representatives of those people have failed to act with sufficient unity and decisiveness. In two successive elections the public ratified a party that they did not want in power. In key decisions the supreme court has ratified the actions of the executive. In war votes and budget votes, the house and senate have bent to his will, even when every reasoning individual knew the actions were folly.
If we are to recover our dignity to that future, we must draw, for now and always, a line in the sand. We are already hypocrites in the histories to be written, having casually supported an impeachment over a sex scandal, and then stood idly by while high crimes and misdemeanors were committed. We have watched in stupification as a gigantic debt has been piled up, and the retirement of the future squandered on pretty explosions for CNN to film. This is our last, our very last chance to set a mark in the future, and prove that were are not merely vegitation that grows on couches and is plucked from the ground - that we are not pommes de terror.
Several other diarists here agitate for visibility in impeachment. I join them in this, and have recommended these diaries when I have seen them. But there is a need for a more cogent, literary, and eloquent form of agitation for impeachment - not merely quoting Republicans in their overblown rhetoric on Clinton, though it has a satisfying element of turn about - but in connect each and every scandal to the out of control nature of the Republican Party. Resolve that, each and every time you write about Abramoff, DeLay, Plame or any other aspect of the goptopus, to mention the need for investigation, and the possibility of impeachment as being acceptable if that is where the evidence leads.
Because we know that Bush has left a trail of crumbs behind him, and we all know where the evidence leads.
Behind this is the need to cohere a larger legitimacy movement - instead of individual issues, such as the sanctity of the ballot box, such as clean elections, such as an end to warrantless searches and tortured interpretations of the law in support of torture - there is one larger issue: the leaders of this government, having failed to provide life, liberty and ample room to pursue happiness, have violated the fundamental social contract. They have used bribery and corruption to cover that fundamental failure. This lost of legitimacy is reflected in a public mood that rises and falls with the price of gasoline and the availability of jobs.
We have become like shocked survivors of a shipwreck, clinging to the rocks. Impeachment is the first step to reasserting that most fundamental truth, that legitimacy of government is all, and a goverment which has lost this, has nothing else but temporary power granted by unwarranted tenure.
Thus the voice of the party, that is its writers, activists, supporters and every day rank and file, must provide political cover with a barrage. This way the faces of the party - elected officials - have room to push harder. By creating a backdrop of just screaming outrage, but logical, consistent and insistent demands for investigation into what smells and impeachment of what stinks - it will both draw in those who are wavering farther up the party, and give cover to many who would love to vote "Yea" on articles of impeachment, but can only do so when there is a Speaker Pelosi to gavel them into order."-Stirling Newberry on Kos.
''Cantwell returning money received from tribes related to Abramoff''
"Sen. Maria Cantwell responded to the growing scandal involving lobbyist Jack Abramoff by announcing Friday that she will donate nearly $18,000 in campaign contributions to an American Indian charity.
Cantwell, a Democrat who is seeking re-election this year, had said Wednesday that she would not return contributions from out-of-state Indian tribes represented by Abramoff, who pleaded guilty this week to fraud, conspiracy and tax evasion in a wide-ranging political corruption investigation.
But on Friday, Cantwell's campaign said she had decided to give money to the National Congress of American Indians Education Fund to clear up any confusion caused by media reports about donations related to Abramoff.
Cantwell "has never taken a penny from confessed criminal Jack Abramoff," her campaign said in a statement, but after reflection decided it was appropriate make the charitable contribution.
Cantwell wanted "to err on the side of caution, so there would not even be a whiff of a connection between his illegal, confessed activities and our campaign," spokesman Michael Meehan said Friday.
The amount being returned, $17,865, includes any funds from organizations or individuals that have ever been connected to Abramoff based on media reports, Meehan said.-from the AP story.
Cantwell, a Democrat who is seeking re-election this year, had said Wednesday that she would not return contributions from out-of-state Indian tribes represented by Abramoff, who pleaded guilty this week to fraud, conspiracy and tax evasion in a wide-ranging political corruption investigation.
But on Friday, Cantwell's campaign said she had decided to give money to the National Congress of American Indians Education Fund to clear up any confusion caused by media reports about donations related to Abramoff.
Cantwell "has never taken a penny from confessed criminal Jack Abramoff," her campaign said in a statement, but after reflection decided it was appropriate make the charitable contribution.
Cantwell wanted "to err on the side of caution, so there would not even be a whiff of a connection between his illegal, confessed activities and our campaign," spokesman Michael Meehan said Friday.
The amount being returned, $17,865, includes any funds from organizations or individuals that have ever been connected to Abramoff based on media reports, Meehan said.-from the AP story.
''Talmadge ends bid for Democratic Party chief''
"Phil Talmadge, a former state Supreme Court justice and ex-legislator, has dropped out of the running for chairman of the state Democratic Party, leaving former King County Councilman Dwight Pelz as the apparent front-runner.
His withdrawal leaves four candidates vying for the chairmanship from which Paul Berendt, the Democrats' chief since 1995, is resigning midway through his current two-year term. The 176-member Democratic State Committee will meet in Kent on Jan. 28 to elect a successor.
Talmadge, a liberal Democrat from West Seattle, said Friday that he quit his short-lived campaign mainly because he wanted to keep his law practice and be a part-time, unsalaried party chairman, but that most Democrats he talked to wanted it to remain a full-time job. Berendt is paid $77,500 a year.
Talmadge said he believes that the Democrats should have an executive director to administer party operations while the chairman functions as "the party spokesman and (to) articulate a vision for the party."
He said another factor in his decision was that he hadn't gotten a clear answer as to whether Democratic Gov. Christine Gregoire would be comfortable with him as party chairman. She was the target of biting criticism by Talmadge when they ran for the Democratic nomination for governor in 2004 before he dropped out for medical reasons.
Talmadge said he was told that Gregoire didn't intend to take sides in the chairmanship race, "which didn't really answer the question I had posed. And frankly, I think governors have a right to have state party chairs that they feel comfortable with."
Talmadge said he only got into the race in late December at the urging of state Sen. Margarita Prentice of Seattle, an old friend of his and a personal enemy of Pelz, a former state Senate colleague.
Pelz, of Seattle, became unemployed Jan. 1 when the County Council was downsized from 13 members to nine and his council district was eliminated. He was an unsuccessful candidate for a Seattle City Council seat in the fall.
Other candidates for the party chairmanship are Laura Ruderman, a former state representative from Redmond and 2004 Democratic nominee for secretary of state; Snohomish County Democratic Chairman Mark Hintz; Pierce County Democratic Chairwoman Jean Brooks; and Bill Harrington, chairman of the 2nd District Democrats in Pierce County.
Like a number of other Democrats, Berendt believes the contest is Pelz's to lose. Berendt noted that Pelz has telephoned the entire state committee and is traveling the state to meet with its members.
Talmadge said he believes the party is in good shape from an operational standpoint, but that its leadership and its candidates frequently fail to articulate Democratic values effectively.
"The party's problem is not on the technical side of the ledger; the party's problem is on the values side of the ledger," he said."-from Saturday's P-I.
His withdrawal leaves four candidates vying for the chairmanship from which Paul Berendt, the Democrats' chief since 1995, is resigning midway through his current two-year term. The 176-member Democratic State Committee will meet in Kent on Jan. 28 to elect a successor.
Talmadge, a liberal Democrat from West Seattle, said Friday that he quit his short-lived campaign mainly because he wanted to keep his law practice and be a part-time, unsalaried party chairman, but that most Democrats he talked to wanted it to remain a full-time job. Berendt is paid $77,500 a year.
Talmadge said he believes that the Democrats should have an executive director to administer party operations while the chairman functions as "the party spokesman and (to) articulate a vision for the party."
He said another factor in his decision was that he hadn't gotten a clear answer as to whether Democratic Gov. Christine Gregoire would be comfortable with him as party chairman. She was the target of biting criticism by Talmadge when they ran for the Democratic nomination for governor in 2004 before he dropped out for medical reasons.
Talmadge said he was told that Gregoire didn't intend to take sides in the chairmanship race, "which didn't really answer the question I had posed. And frankly, I think governors have a right to have state party chairs that they feel comfortable with."
Talmadge said he only got into the race in late December at the urging of state Sen. Margarita Prentice of Seattle, an old friend of his and a personal enemy of Pelz, a former state Senate colleague.
Pelz, of Seattle, became unemployed Jan. 1 when the County Council was downsized from 13 members to nine and his council district was eliminated. He was an unsuccessful candidate for a Seattle City Council seat in the fall.
Other candidates for the party chairmanship are Laura Ruderman, a former state representative from Redmond and 2004 Democratic nominee for secretary of state; Snohomish County Democratic Chairman Mark Hintz; Pierce County Democratic Chairwoman Jean Brooks; and Bill Harrington, chairman of the 2nd District Democrats in Pierce County.
Like a number of other Democrats, Berendt believes the contest is Pelz's to lose. Berendt noted that Pelz has telephoned the entire state committee and is traveling the state to meet with its members.
Talmadge said he believes the party is in good shape from an operational standpoint, but that its leadership and its candidates frequently fail to articulate Democratic values effectively.
"The party's problem is not on the technical side of the ledger; the party's problem is on the values side of the ledger," he said."-from Saturday's P-I.
Friday, January 06, 2006
Dean: ''White House Must Tell the Truth About Abramoff Ties''
"Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean called on the Bush White House to come clean regarding the extent of the contact between Abramoff and senior White House officials:
"Because President Bush has yet to return the more than $100,000 in money Jack Abramoff personally raised for him, and given reports of his extensive dealings with senior White House officials, the Administration has a responsibility to disclose their contacts and detail their relationship with this admitted felon.
"As a Bush Pioneer, Abramoff bragged about the influence he held at the White House, as did his former lobbying partner who claimed that Abramoff had direct access to the President. Abramoff also arranged meetings with the President and members of the Bush Administration for his clients, who later received favorable treatment.
"Until he was charged with committing three federal crimes, Abramoff used his Republican contacts, including his ties to the White House, to create an extensive pay-to-play system where political money was exchanged for policy outcomes. To begin to clear the growing ethical cloud over the White House, President Bush must disclose his Administration's contacts and detail their relationship with this admitted felon. The American people deserve the truth."-from the DNC.
"Because President Bush has yet to return the more than $100,000 in money Jack Abramoff personally raised for him, and given reports of his extensive dealings with senior White House officials, the Administration has a responsibility to disclose their contacts and detail their relationship with this admitted felon.
"As a Bush Pioneer, Abramoff bragged about the influence he held at the White House, as did his former lobbying partner who claimed that Abramoff had direct access to the President. Abramoff also arranged meetings with the President and members of the Bush Administration for his clients, who later received favorable treatment.
"Until he was charged with committing three federal crimes, Abramoff used his Republican contacts, including his ties to the White House, to create an extensive pay-to-play system where political money was exchanged for policy outcomes. To begin to clear the growing ethical cloud over the White House, President Bush must disclose his Administration's contacts and detail their relationship with this admitted felon. The American people deserve the truth."-from the DNC.
''GOP lawmakers wrong about estate tax effect on farms'' (UPDATED)
How often do you see a headline like that on a news story? Give Chris McGann and the P-I credit for this one. I'm praying the next one will be "Bush Lies Again." Goldy at Horsesass.org piles on the evergreen rovians with "WA GOP: stupid is as stupid does."
Update: Goldy has added two new posts since the above. One gives us new poll numbers for Gregroire and Cantwell and the other is a very entertaining "Goldy announces his candidacy for the Seattle City Council!" When he's good, he's very, very good.
Update: Goldy has added two new posts since the above. One gives us new poll numbers for Gregroire and Cantwell and the other is a very entertaining "Goldy announces his candidacy for the Seattle City Council!" When he's good, he's very, very good.
''Operation Homecoming!' Seattle Town Meeting''
"Brave Troops, Foolish Leaders! Begin Operation Homecoming" The Backbone Campaign and Progressive Democrats of America will host an event in Seattle with speakers, art, and organizing to end the occupation of Iraq and force Congressional investigation into the propaganizing and manipulation of Congress and the American to force us into this foolish war. Congressman Jim McDermott will join other speakers.
Saturday, January 07, 2006
1:00 PM until 4:00 PM
Seattle Labor Temple
2800 First Ave., Seattle, WA
Call The Backbone Campaign at 206-408-8058 for more information.
We are exploring the possibility of a "Press the Press" procession from 3-4 PM, to make a visit to the media outlets that decide not to attend. Sign up here."-from AfterDowningStreet.org.
Lest you think this an event happening in a just a few very blue places: "As of Jan 6th we have 140 events planned for Saturday, Jan 7," according to AfterDowningStreet.org.
Update: "Air America to Broadcast Live from Out of Iraq Event Saturday Night." AfterDowningStreet.org informs us that "Flanders will broadcast live from one of the more than 130 "Out of Iraq" events planned for the day nationwide." You can listen to AM1090 in Seattle on Saturday from 4-7pm or online at the same time.
Saturday, January 07, 2006
1:00 PM until 4:00 PM
Seattle Labor Temple
2800 First Ave., Seattle, WA
Call The Backbone Campaign at 206-408-8058 for more information.
We are exploring the possibility of a "Press the Press" procession from 3-4 PM, to make a visit to the media outlets that decide not to attend. Sign up here."-from AfterDowningStreet.org.
Lest you think this an event happening in a just a few very blue places: "As of Jan 6th we have 140 events planned for Saturday, Jan 7," according to AfterDowningStreet.org.
Update: "Air America to Broadcast Live from Out of Iraq Event Saturday Night." AfterDowningStreet.org informs us that "Flanders will broadcast live from one of the more than 130 "Out of Iraq" events planned for the day nationwide." You can listen to AM1090 in Seattle on Saturday from 4-7pm or online at the same time.
Thursday, January 05, 2006
Howard Dean: ''Alito Fails the Test''
"It's been widely acknowledged that President Bush had a bad year in 2005. One of the problems America faces as a result is the White House's willingness to make decisions based on what's good for the administration politically rather than what's right for America. The nomination of Judge Samuel A. Alito Jr. to replace Sandra Day O'Connor is an example of this. The president hopes to make up ground with his right-wing base, instead of appointing someone who will have the confidence of a wide range of Americans. Over the past few months, as we've learned more about Judge Alito's core beliefs and the kind of justice he would be, it has become clear why the Senate should reject his nomination.
Judge Alito's decisions, such as his attacks on the Family and Medical Leave protections and his willingness to excuse the grossest form of sexual harassment in the workplace based on technicalities, have harmed working people. Judge Alito has also attacked Americans' personal liberties by approving the inappropriate strip search of a 10-year-old and defending the construction of all-white juries by unscrupulous prosecutors trying black defendants. A Supreme Court justice must show impartiality and fairness. Judge Alito does not meet that test.
Further complicating Judge Alito's nomination is a lack of credibility that has emerged as he has tried to distance himself from his record and prior statements. He has supported government overreaching into women's personal lives. He has memory lapses regarding membership in the ultraconservative group Concerned Alumni of Princeton, and he failed to recuse himself from a major Vanguard mutual funds case, despite pledging -- under oath during confirmation hearings for his Third Circuit judgeship -- to do so.
On Nov. 3, The Boston Globe reported Judge Alito held $390,000 worth of Vanguard mutual funds during the time he ruled for the company in a civil case before him. These facts are not in dispute. When the chief administrative judge for the circuit reviewed the case on complaint, he vacated Judge Alito's decision and assigned the case to another panel. Judge Alito complained vigorously. He has since failed to offer a credible explanation about why he broke his promise to recuse himself from the case.
Every American should shudder at the prospect of an ethically tone-deaf judge sitting on the one institution in Washington not yet in the pocket of the extremists who comprise the right wing of the Republican Party.
A culture of corruption, arrogance of power and insensitivity to the appearance of conflict of interest has plagued key Republican officeholders for the past five years -- from Republican Senate leader Bill Frist's ownership of stock he falsely claimed was in a blind trust to the repeated evidence that Halliburton, formerly run by Vice President Dick Cheney, benefited from no-bid contracts in Iraq to revelations our government may be illegally spying on Americans and paying journalists for positive stories. House Judiciary Chairman Jim Sensenbrenner has traveled the world, racking up $177,000 worth of lobbyist-funded trips. Rep. Tom DeLay has been indicted for money laundering. Republican super-lobbyist Jack Abramoff pleaded guilty to three federal criminal charges. Karl Rove still has a security clearance, despite his role in leaking the identity of a CIA agent during wartime. The vice president's chief of staff has been indicted for lying to a grand jury. We need honesty and backbone in Washington, most especially on the court.
I oppose Judge Alito's nomination. I want to be proud of our government again. That can only happen if the rule of law, and the integrity that it requires, are clearly foremost in the consideration of every decision made by the court. There are simply too many writings in Judge Alito's record currying favor with the extreme right that show a willingness to favor government power over individual liberties. How can we believe that he will put aside his personal beliefs and keep an open mind when he has already broken one promise made to the American people? America needs strength now, and America needs a Supreme Court where personal and political considerations do not appear to influence any decision at any time. Judge Alito's nomination must be rejected. And if President Bush could find it in his heart, he needs to nominate someone to the court who will bring us together, not continue to drive us apart."-from his op-ed.
Judge Alito's decisions, such as his attacks on the Family and Medical Leave protections and his willingness to excuse the grossest form of sexual harassment in the workplace based on technicalities, have harmed working people. Judge Alito has also attacked Americans' personal liberties by approving the inappropriate strip search of a 10-year-old and defending the construction of all-white juries by unscrupulous prosecutors trying black defendants. A Supreme Court justice must show impartiality and fairness. Judge Alito does not meet that test.
Further complicating Judge Alito's nomination is a lack of credibility that has emerged as he has tried to distance himself from his record and prior statements. He has supported government overreaching into women's personal lives. He has memory lapses regarding membership in the ultraconservative group Concerned Alumni of Princeton, and he failed to recuse himself from a major Vanguard mutual funds case, despite pledging -- under oath during confirmation hearings for his Third Circuit judgeship -- to do so.
On Nov. 3, The Boston Globe reported Judge Alito held $390,000 worth of Vanguard mutual funds during the time he ruled for the company in a civil case before him. These facts are not in dispute. When the chief administrative judge for the circuit reviewed the case on complaint, he vacated Judge Alito's decision and assigned the case to another panel. Judge Alito complained vigorously. He has since failed to offer a credible explanation about why he broke his promise to recuse himself from the case.
Every American should shudder at the prospect of an ethically tone-deaf judge sitting on the one institution in Washington not yet in the pocket of the extremists who comprise the right wing of the Republican Party.
A culture of corruption, arrogance of power and insensitivity to the appearance of conflict of interest has plagued key Republican officeholders for the past five years -- from Republican Senate leader Bill Frist's ownership of stock he falsely claimed was in a blind trust to the repeated evidence that Halliburton, formerly run by Vice President Dick Cheney, benefited from no-bid contracts in Iraq to revelations our government may be illegally spying on Americans and paying journalists for positive stories. House Judiciary Chairman Jim Sensenbrenner has traveled the world, racking up $177,000 worth of lobbyist-funded trips. Rep. Tom DeLay has been indicted for money laundering. Republican super-lobbyist Jack Abramoff pleaded guilty to three federal criminal charges. Karl Rove still has a security clearance, despite his role in leaking the identity of a CIA agent during wartime. The vice president's chief of staff has been indicted for lying to a grand jury. We need honesty and backbone in Washington, most especially on the court.
I oppose Judge Alito's nomination. I want to be proud of our government again. That can only happen if the rule of law, and the integrity that it requires, are clearly foremost in the consideration of every decision made by the court. There are simply too many writings in Judge Alito's record currying favor with the extreme right that show a willingness to favor government power over individual liberties. How can we believe that he will put aside his personal beliefs and keep an open mind when he has already broken one promise made to the American people? America needs strength now, and America needs a Supreme Court where personal and political considerations do not appear to influence any decision at any time. Judge Alito's nomination must be rejected. And if President Bush could find it in his heart, he needs to nominate someone to the court who will bring us together, not continue to drive us apart."-from his op-ed.
"Dean's efforts"
"The National Journal's subscription-only Hotline has a good piece on what Dean has accomplished. The sort of piece you won't see in the WaPo or other publications too busy pushing the "Dean is insane and ineffective" storyline.
With permission from the publication, here it is in whole:
DNC: Spreading The Word. And The Boots.
"Howard Dean has turned out to be the biggest surprise of the season. He's a good man. And he truly gets it." Those are the words of Charles Soechting, the TX Dem chair who when Dean announced his bid for DNC chair had Soechting grtting his teeth. At the time, the Texan worried that Dean didn't get the problems parties grappled with and certainly didn't possess the regional sympathy to figure out how to win elections in the South.
But now, closing in on Dean's 1st anniversary as DNC chair, Soechting has seen enough to convince him that Dean "knows what it to makes Texas truly competitive."
Veterans of Dem politics who work on state and local campaigns are eager to praise Dean. In part, that's because Dean has devoted the bulk of the DNC's staff, energy and time to fulfilling his chairman's campaign promise: to revitalize the Dem Party at the precinct level.
Dem strategists in DC often ask their colleagues: "What is Dean good for?" They moan that he's not raising as much as money as they expected or his surrogates promised; that he hasn't been Joe Trippi-like and revolutionized the party's small donor outreach; that he can't shut his liberal mouth. Dean's admirers have ready counter-arguments, but they've lacked something tangible to bat down the critics. But now, they say, the party's investment in states is beginning to pay off.
There are approximately 1,963 election precincts in WV. At the beginning of '05, the state Dem Party could only identify six with active Dem organizers. Twenty years ago, WV Dems abandoned their precinct-level party building operations. Part of the problem was parochial: precinct chairs didn't trust county chairs, who didn't trust the elites running the state party, who certainly didn't trust the effete liberals running the national party. The cycle of neglect desiccated what organization remained.
When Dean was running for chair, he took a keen interest in that state's tale of woe. And it was typical of what he saw in states across the country. So Dean promised state chairs: where the party had nothing, it would have something. The DNC would pay for organizers to spend four years in their states, training county chairs and precinct captains. In return for the paid staff, Dean would expect results -- larger voter files, more volunteers, higher vote totals. State chairs liked the message. Dems like Soechting, in TX, had complained for years that the national party saw them as ATMs and ignored them most of the time. Dean promised he'd repair the relationship between the party and its state affiliates. In large measure, he did. (Soecthing says today that the state party feels more connected to the DNC than ever before.)
Dean's defenders say he's making good on his pledge. The DNC has trained 136 new organizers and sent them to 30 states, and by the end of 3/06, party officials say every state's precinct training program will be up and running. In WV, the party now employs four full-time organizers. Recalcitrant county chairs are warming to their presence; one small county that had zero precinct captains in 2004 has twelve today.
"That may not seem like a huge step," says Parag Mehta, the DNC's director of training, "but in that party of West Virginia, where Democrats were afraid to put up yard signs for fear of being taunted, suddenly, there's a Democratic presence."
What's Dean Doing With My Money?
"Building the party's capacity," a favorite phrase of Dean and his staff, takes time, and results might not be visible for years. Fundraisers, in particular, like to see parties win elections, and many view the national committee as a vessel for money and message -- not for organization.
Dean based his chairman's candidacy on the opposite premise: cede the message propagation to the party's Cong. and state leaders, and use the national party's resources to birth more Dem precinct captains and seed victories years from now. Adds DNC exec. dir. Tom McMahon: "There's a lot of disinformation about this. Because it's a new way about doing something. Until you have the face-to-face conversations, you can't explain to them what you're doing." To Democrats concerned about money and allied with potential WH '08 candidates, McMahon says he tells them, "Our goal is: whoever the nominee is in 2008, we want them to be able to look at all fifty states and see where there best chances are, versus trying to make a snap decision based on limited information in many states six months before the election."
Dean's detractors say that spreading 130 employees across 40 states isn't the best use of the party's resources. And they complain he hasn't leveraged his Internet fundraising talent, that he has poor relationships with major donors, that he can't keep his foot out of his mouth. Some in his circle of advisers admit that DC has not tamed what one delicately termed as Dean's "independent streak," which has led him to pontificate (with specifics) on contentious policy matters, often angering elected officials. But another of Dean's close advisers, Steve McMahon, said: "He sometimes gets out there in front of people. More often than not, he's absolutely right." And aides to Dean say he recognizes the critical role that major donors play in financing the party's operations and that he has scheduled more personal meetings with them. He often brings along documents explaining his state-based efforts.
So far, the party elite has not paid close attention. There are signs, though, that when they do, they like what they see. NH Dem Chair Kathy Sullivan exudes enthusiasm when asked about her DNC contingent: "We now have 10 people working under the [party] banner, including the DNC organizers. We have never had this big a staff so far in advance of the election cycle." ND Rep. Earl Pomeroy told Dean to "shut up" after a radio interview where Dean seemed to pooh-pooh the idea of victory in Iraq. When Pomeroy called Dean to apologize, he said, according to a Dem briefed on the call, that what the DNC was doing in his state was making a difference. Rep. Shelley Berkley (D-NV) stopped by to greet Nevadans when they trained with Mehta. Even Sen. Ted Kennedy sat down with trainees from MA, ME and RI.
When Clay Middleton returned to SC after a year with a National Guard unit in Iraq, his former boss, Rep. James Clyburn (D), encouraged him to apply for a DNC organizing position. Middleton, 24, is already a rising star. SC's party had been unable to furnish a how-to guide for potential precinct captains; Middleton read dozens of them at the DNC in DC and then wrote one for his state.
The DNC says it sees measurable results in MS, too. For years, the state party had one full-time staffer. County chairs had little contact with one another and were only active right before elections. Less than six months into its effort, the Dems claim to have trained precinct captains in 20% of the state's 82 counties.
Getting The States On Board
Several states have yet to agree on a plan with the DNC. Others say they'd rather have the national party pay for non-staff infrastructure like computer systems. FL wants the DNC to pay for a voter file director. And there is also a bit of friction between the organizers and state-based interest groups. In OH, many labor union officials habituated to providing the field capacity for Dems are curious about what the organizers will do. The answer is: it depends on the state. Within weeks of Dean's election, Tom McMahon and DNC pol. dir. Pam Womack traveled to each state and territory and took stock. McMahon says they consulted with state party rep, elected officials, consultants who had worked in the state, activists and key interest group leaders.
The DNC then asked state parties to draw up a plan. The DNC haggled; the states haggled back. Many wanted full-time communications directors; the DNC coughed up money for 23 of them. After agreements were signed, states hired the staff, and sent them to Mehta, a soft-spoken 29-year-old from Texas, for training. For two days, Mehta leads his charges through the basics of organizing: How they build precinct organizing programs. How press and communications work best. How the party targets particular voters. What the laws are. How to raise money. How to decipher voter files. How to canvass. How to run phone banks. They get a personal visit from Dean (he's an incurable gossip in private, one trainee noted to his delight] -- and they meet the party's regional political directors -- the men and women who will make sure they meet their targets back in the states. The organizers themselves are diverse. Rita Royals, a 56-year-old former rape crisis counselor, plies the rural counties in Northern Mississippi. She describes her training as intense - but "wonderful."
Royals: "I guess because I'm from the South, I wasn't quite used to the pace. We had five minute breaks." When staffers like Royals return home, the organizers work with county chairs -- or work with state executive committees to find chairs to fill counties without them. The organizers and county chairs recruit precinct captains. The precinct captains are given specific targets: find 25 volunteers by 11/06 -- say -- and assign them specific tasks within the precinct. Some county chairs are at first reluctant to open their doors to the organizers.
That's usually when Middleton shows them his new precinct manual. He promises to attend their county executive committee meetings. He helps them to raise money and to recruit volunteers and candidates." Mehta is constantly on the road, tweaking the system and rah-rahing the troops. "We train them and we train them repeatedly," he says of his organizers. "This is stage one." Stage two is to help the state party conceive the 2006 coordinated campaign plans. Stage three is to test those plans; stage four is to refine them and help draft county-by-county plans for the 2008 general elections. By 2008, he hopes the party will have volunteers in all 203,000 American voting precincts (Hotline reporting, 1/5).-posted by Kos on Kos.
Update: Kos is in a love-heat over Dean today with another post, "A 50-State Party." Excerpt: "The Democratic Party is in the upswing in the Mountain West and the South, in places like Montana and Virginia, because Democrats there have made a serious effort to compete for votes everywhere, rather than make a nominal effort to be an "also-ran" outside the Democratic-density areas. As [Virginia Gov. Mark] Warner asks, how many more times will the Democrats run presidential campaigns where they abandon thirty-something southern and western states and "launch a national campaign that goes after sixteen states and then hope that we can hit a triple bank shot to get to that seventeenth state?"
Of course, the fruits of this strategy aren't concentrated on presidential elections. In the book we spend time looking at the House picture as well. But the DNC exists for presidential races. We have the DSCC for the Senate, the DCCC for the House, and the state parties for state offices.
But for too long, these organizations have worked in their silos to the exclusion of the bigger picture. That's what allowed the DNC to focus primarily on the ever-shrinking number of battleground states to the detriment of House and Senate races elsewhere, in places like Oklahoma and Alaska.
Dean, for the first time, has decided on a more holistic approach. He's no longer focused on just bolstering the presidential ticket in 2008. Rather, he will go down to the precinct level and build locally. And, over time, this will have effect not just at the local or state level, or at the House or Senate level, but also all the way up the ticket to the top dog him- or herself.
This is exactly the sort of thing we argue for in our book. It's good to see Dean gets it. The states definitely get it. What's left is the old rotting establishment -- the consultants and party hacks who wish things would go back to the way they were.
What good is Dean if the money the DNC raises ends up back in the states, far from their grubby, greedy palms?"
With permission from the publication, here it is in whole:
DNC: Spreading The Word. And The Boots.
"Howard Dean has turned out to be the biggest surprise of the season. He's a good man. And he truly gets it." Those are the words of Charles Soechting, the TX Dem chair who when Dean announced his bid for DNC chair had Soechting grtting his teeth. At the time, the Texan worried that Dean didn't get the problems parties grappled with and certainly didn't possess the regional sympathy to figure out how to win elections in the South.
But now, closing in on Dean's 1st anniversary as DNC chair, Soechting has seen enough to convince him that Dean "knows what it to makes Texas truly competitive."
Veterans of Dem politics who work on state and local campaigns are eager to praise Dean. In part, that's because Dean has devoted the bulk of the DNC's staff, energy and time to fulfilling his chairman's campaign promise: to revitalize the Dem Party at the precinct level.
Dem strategists in DC often ask their colleagues: "What is Dean good for?" They moan that he's not raising as much as money as they expected or his surrogates promised; that he hasn't been Joe Trippi-like and revolutionized the party's small donor outreach; that he can't shut his liberal mouth. Dean's admirers have ready counter-arguments, but they've lacked something tangible to bat down the critics. But now, they say, the party's investment in states is beginning to pay off.
There are approximately 1,963 election precincts in WV. At the beginning of '05, the state Dem Party could only identify six with active Dem organizers. Twenty years ago, WV Dems abandoned their precinct-level party building operations. Part of the problem was parochial: precinct chairs didn't trust county chairs, who didn't trust the elites running the state party, who certainly didn't trust the effete liberals running the national party. The cycle of neglect desiccated what organization remained.
When Dean was running for chair, he took a keen interest in that state's tale of woe. And it was typical of what he saw in states across the country. So Dean promised state chairs: where the party had nothing, it would have something. The DNC would pay for organizers to spend four years in their states, training county chairs and precinct captains. In return for the paid staff, Dean would expect results -- larger voter files, more volunteers, higher vote totals. State chairs liked the message. Dems like Soechting, in TX, had complained for years that the national party saw them as ATMs and ignored them most of the time. Dean promised he'd repair the relationship between the party and its state affiliates. In large measure, he did. (Soecthing says today that the state party feels more connected to the DNC than ever before.)
Dean's defenders say he's making good on his pledge. The DNC has trained 136 new organizers and sent them to 30 states, and by the end of 3/06, party officials say every state's precinct training program will be up and running. In WV, the party now employs four full-time organizers. Recalcitrant county chairs are warming to their presence; one small county that had zero precinct captains in 2004 has twelve today.
"That may not seem like a huge step," says Parag Mehta, the DNC's director of training, "but in that party of West Virginia, where Democrats were afraid to put up yard signs for fear of being taunted, suddenly, there's a Democratic presence."
What's Dean Doing With My Money?
"Building the party's capacity," a favorite phrase of Dean and his staff, takes time, and results might not be visible for years. Fundraisers, in particular, like to see parties win elections, and many view the national committee as a vessel for money and message -- not for organization.
Dean based his chairman's candidacy on the opposite premise: cede the message propagation to the party's Cong. and state leaders, and use the national party's resources to birth more Dem precinct captains and seed victories years from now. Adds DNC exec. dir. Tom McMahon: "There's a lot of disinformation about this. Because it's a new way about doing something. Until you have the face-to-face conversations, you can't explain to them what you're doing." To Democrats concerned about money and allied with potential WH '08 candidates, McMahon says he tells them, "Our goal is: whoever the nominee is in 2008, we want them to be able to look at all fifty states and see where there best chances are, versus trying to make a snap decision based on limited information in many states six months before the election."
Dean's detractors say that spreading 130 employees across 40 states isn't the best use of the party's resources. And they complain he hasn't leveraged his Internet fundraising talent, that he has poor relationships with major donors, that he can't keep his foot out of his mouth. Some in his circle of advisers admit that DC has not tamed what one delicately termed as Dean's "independent streak," which has led him to pontificate (with specifics) on contentious policy matters, often angering elected officials. But another of Dean's close advisers, Steve McMahon, said: "He sometimes gets out there in front of people. More often than not, he's absolutely right." And aides to Dean say he recognizes the critical role that major donors play in financing the party's operations and that he has scheduled more personal meetings with them. He often brings along documents explaining his state-based efforts.
So far, the party elite has not paid close attention. There are signs, though, that when they do, they like what they see. NH Dem Chair Kathy Sullivan exudes enthusiasm when asked about her DNC contingent: "We now have 10 people working under the [party] banner, including the DNC organizers. We have never had this big a staff so far in advance of the election cycle." ND Rep. Earl Pomeroy told Dean to "shut up" after a radio interview where Dean seemed to pooh-pooh the idea of victory in Iraq. When Pomeroy called Dean to apologize, he said, according to a Dem briefed on the call, that what the DNC was doing in his state was making a difference. Rep. Shelley Berkley (D-NV) stopped by to greet Nevadans when they trained with Mehta. Even Sen. Ted Kennedy sat down with trainees from MA, ME and RI.
When Clay Middleton returned to SC after a year with a National Guard unit in Iraq, his former boss, Rep. James Clyburn (D), encouraged him to apply for a DNC organizing position. Middleton, 24, is already a rising star. SC's party had been unable to furnish a how-to guide for potential precinct captains; Middleton read dozens of them at the DNC in DC and then wrote one for his state.
The DNC says it sees measurable results in MS, too. For years, the state party had one full-time staffer. County chairs had little contact with one another and were only active right before elections. Less than six months into its effort, the Dems claim to have trained precinct captains in 20% of the state's 82 counties.
Getting The States On Board
Several states have yet to agree on a plan with the DNC. Others say they'd rather have the national party pay for non-staff infrastructure like computer systems. FL wants the DNC to pay for a voter file director. And there is also a bit of friction between the organizers and state-based interest groups. In OH, many labor union officials habituated to providing the field capacity for Dems are curious about what the organizers will do. The answer is: it depends on the state. Within weeks of Dean's election, Tom McMahon and DNC pol. dir. Pam Womack traveled to each state and territory and took stock. McMahon says they consulted with state party rep, elected officials, consultants who had worked in the state, activists and key interest group leaders.
The DNC then asked state parties to draw up a plan. The DNC haggled; the states haggled back. Many wanted full-time communications directors; the DNC coughed up money for 23 of them. After agreements were signed, states hired the staff, and sent them to Mehta, a soft-spoken 29-year-old from Texas, for training. For two days, Mehta leads his charges through the basics of organizing: How they build precinct organizing programs. How press and communications work best. How the party targets particular voters. What the laws are. How to raise money. How to decipher voter files. How to canvass. How to run phone banks. They get a personal visit from Dean (he's an incurable gossip in private, one trainee noted to his delight] -- and they meet the party's regional political directors -- the men and women who will make sure they meet their targets back in the states. The organizers themselves are diverse. Rita Royals, a 56-year-old former rape crisis counselor, plies the rural counties in Northern Mississippi. She describes her training as intense - but "wonderful."
Royals: "I guess because I'm from the South, I wasn't quite used to the pace. We had five minute breaks." When staffers like Royals return home, the organizers work with county chairs -- or work with state executive committees to find chairs to fill counties without them. The organizers and county chairs recruit precinct captains. The precinct captains are given specific targets: find 25 volunteers by 11/06 -- say -- and assign them specific tasks within the precinct. Some county chairs are at first reluctant to open their doors to the organizers.
That's usually when Middleton shows them his new precinct manual. He promises to attend their county executive committee meetings. He helps them to raise money and to recruit volunteers and candidates." Mehta is constantly on the road, tweaking the system and rah-rahing the troops. "We train them and we train them repeatedly," he says of his organizers. "This is stage one." Stage two is to help the state party conceive the 2006 coordinated campaign plans. Stage three is to test those plans; stage four is to refine them and help draft county-by-county plans for the 2008 general elections. By 2008, he hopes the party will have volunteers in all 203,000 American voting precincts (Hotline reporting, 1/5).-posted by Kos on Kos.
Update: Kos is in a love-heat over Dean today with another post, "A 50-State Party." Excerpt: "The Democratic Party is in the upswing in the Mountain West and the South, in places like Montana and Virginia, because Democrats there have made a serious effort to compete for votes everywhere, rather than make a nominal effort to be an "also-ran" outside the Democratic-density areas. As [Virginia Gov. Mark] Warner asks, how many more times will the Democrats run presidential campaigns where they abandon thirty-something southern and western states and "launch a national campaign that goes after sixteen states and then hope that we can hit a triple bank shot to get to that seventeenth state?"
Of course, the fruits of this strategy aren't concentrated on presidential elections. In the book we spend time looking at the House picture as well. But the DNC exists for presidential races. We have the DSCC for the Senate, the DCCC for the House, and the state parties for state offices.
But for too long, these organizations have worked in their silos to the exclusion of the bigger picture. That's what allowed the DNC to focus primarily on the ever-shrinking number of battleground states to the detriment of House and Senate races elsewhere, in places like Oklahoma and Alaska.
Dean, for the first time, has decided on a more holistic approach. He's no longer focused on just bolstering the presidential ticket in 2008. Rather, he will go down to the precinct level and build locally. And, over time, this will have effect not just at the local or state level, or at the House or Senate level, but also all the way up the ticket to the top dog him- or herself.
This is exactly the sort of thing we argue for in our book. It's good to see Dean gets it. The states definitely get it. What's left is the old rotting establishment -- the consultants and party hacks who wish things would go back to the way they were.
What good is Dean if the money the DNC raises ends up back in the states, far from their grubby, greedy palms?"
''Strategy Session''
This week's Stranger gives us a quick overview of the upcoming deliberations in Olympia: "This Year's Legislative Season is All About Posturing." The Weakly is gentler and puts it this way: "In Olympia, Democratic leaders resolve to combine 'kitchen table' issues, like education and jobs, with fiscal prudence. It's an election year, after all."
The Scoop from 'State of War'
Harry Smith interviews NY Times reporter James Risen on CBS News (video) about his new book, "State of War: The Secret History of the CIA and the Bush Administration." The video is accompanied on the CBS News site by an article from The Nation, "A Question Of Privilege." For a summary of the book's "new powerful allegations," check out this post on AlterNet by Jan Frel. Read 'em and weep. Thanks to Annie Robbins for passing along the CBS News post.
Update: Crooks and Liars posts, "James Risen Speaks," with video from NBC's Today Show. For a more humorous (though no less damning) account of the rovian regime, try "Fear and Loathing, Campaign 2004."
Update: Crooks and Liars posts, "James Risen Speaks," with video from NBC's Today Show. For a more humorous (though no less damning) account of the rovian regime, try "Fear and Loathing, Campaign 2004."
From Baghad Burning: ''2006...''
"Here we are in the first days of 2006. What does the ‘6’ symbolize? How about- 6 hours of no electricity for every one hour of electricity? Or… 6 hours of waiting in line for gasoline that is three times as expensive as it was in 2005? Or an average of six explosions per day near our area alone?
The beginning of the new year isn’t a promising one. Prices seem to have shot up on everything from fuels like kerosene and cooking gas, to tomatoes. A typical conversation with Abu Ammar our local fruit/vegetable vendor goes something like this:
R: “Oh nice lemons today Abu Ammar… give us a kilo.”
Abu A: “They are Syrian. You should see the tomatoes- if you think these are nice, take a look at those.”
R: “Hmmm… they do look good. Two kilos of those. How much will that be?”
Abu A: “That will be 3600 dinars.”
R (feigning shock and awe): “3600 dinars! What? That is almost double what we paid a week ago… why?”
Abu A (feigning sorrow and regret): “Habibti… you know what my supplier has to go through to bring me these vegetables? The cost of gasoline has gone up! I swear on the life of my mother that I’m only profiting 50 dinars per kilo…”
R: “Your mother is dead, isn’t she?”
Abu A: “Yes yes- but you know how valuable the dear woman was to me- may Allah have mercy on her- and on us all! The dogs in the government are going to kill us with these prices…”
R (sighing heavily): “You voted for the dogs last year Abu Ammar…”
Abu A: “Shhh… don’t call them dogs- it’s not proper. Anyway, it’s not their fault- the Americans are making them do it… my Allah curse them and their children…”
R (with eyes rolling) and Abu A (in unison): “… and their children’s children.”
A few days ago, the cousin took me to buy a pack of recordable CDs. The price had gone up a whole dollar, which may seem a pittance to the average American or European, but it must be remembered that many Iraqis make as little as $100 a month and complete families are expected to survive on that.
“B. why has the price of these lousy CDs gone up so much???” I demanded from the shop owner who is also a friend, “Don’t tell me your supplier has also pushed the prices up on you because of the gasoline shortage?” I asked sarcastically. No- supplies cost the same for him- he has not needed to stock up yet. But this is how he explained it: his car takes 60 liters of gasoline. It needs to be refueled every 2-3 days. The official price of gasoline was 50 Iraqi dinars before, so it cost him around 3000 dinars to fill up his car, which was nearly two dollars. Now it costs 9000 Iraqi dinars IF he fills it up at a gas station and not using black market gasoline which will cost him around 15,000 dinars- five times the former price- and this every two to three days. He also has to purchase extra gasoline for the shop generator which needs to be working almost constantly, now that electricity is about four hours daily. “Now how am I supposed to cover that increase in my costs if I don’t sell CDs at a higher price?”
People buy black market gasoline because for many, waiting in line five, six, seven… ten hours isn’t an option. We’ve worked out a sort of agreement amongst 4 or 5 houses in the neighborhood. According to a schedule (which is somewhat complicated and involves license plate numbers, number of children per family, etc.), one of us spends the day filling up the car and then the gasoline is distributed between the four or five involved neighbors.
The process of extracting the gasoline from the car itself once it is back at the house was a rather disgusting and unhealthy one up until nearly a year ago. A hose was inserted into the gasoline tank and one of they unlucky neighbors would suck on it until the first surge of gasoline came flowing out. Now, thanks to both local and Chinese ingenuity, we have miniature gasoline pumps to suck out the gasoline. “The man who invented these,” My cousin once declared emotionally, holding the pump up like a trophy, “deserves a Nobel Prize in… something or another.”
I know for most of the world, highly priced gasoline is a common concern. For Iraqis, it represents how the situation is deteriorating. Gasoline and kerosene were literally cheaper than bottled water prior to the war. It’s incredibly frustrating that while the price of petrol is at a high, one of the worlds leading oil-producing countries isn’t producing enough to cover its own needs.
There is talk of major mismanagement and theft in the Oil Ministry. Chalabi took over several days ago and a friend who works in the ministry says the takeover is a joke. “You know how they used to check our handbags when we first walked into the ministry?” She asked the day after Chalabi crowned himself Oil Emperor, “Now WE check our handbags after we leave the ministry- you know- to see if Chalabi stole anything.”
I guess the Iraqis who thought the US was going to turn Iraq into another America weren’t really far from the mark- we too now enjoy inane leaders, shady elections, a shaky economy, large-scale unemployment and soaring gas prices.
Goodbye 2005- the year of SCIRI, fraudulent elections, secret torture chambers, car bombs, white phosphorous, assassinations, sectarianism and fundamentalism… you will not be missed.
Let us see what 2006 has in store for us."-Riverbend on her blog.
The beginning of the new year isn’t a promising one. Prices seem to have shot up on everything from fuels like kerosene and cooking gas, to tomatoes. A typical conversation with Abu Ammar our local fruit/vegetable vendor goes something like this:
R: “Oh nice lemons today Abu Ammar… give us a kilo.”
Abu A: “They are Syrian. You should see the tomatoes- if you think these are nice, take a look at those.”
R: “Hmmm… they do look good. Two kilos of those. How much will that be?”
Abu A: “That will be 3600 dinars.”
R (feigning shock and awe): “3600 dinars! What? That is almost double what we paid a week ago… why?”
Abu A (feigning sorrow and regret): “Habibti… you know what my supplier has to go through to bring me these vegetables? The cost of gasoline has gone up! I swear on the life of my mother that I’m only profiting 50 dinars per kilo…”
R: “Your mother is dead, isn’t she?”
Abu A: “Yes yes- but you know how valuable the dear woman was to me- may Allah have mercy on her- and on us all! The dogs in the government are going to kill us with these prices…”
R (sighing heavily): “You voted for the dogs last year Abu Ammar…”
Abu A: “Shhh… don’t call them dogs- it’s not proper. Anyway, it’s not their fault- the Americans are making them do it… my Allah curse them and their children…”
R (with eyes rolling) and Abu A (in unison): “… and their children’s children.”
A few days ago, the cousin took me to buy a pack of recordable CDs. The price had gone up a whole dollar, which may seem a pittance to the average American or European, but it must be remembered that many Iraqis make as little as $100 a month and complete families are expected to survive on that.
“B. why has the price of these lousy CDs gone up so much???” I demanded from the shop owner who is also a friend, “Don’t tell me your supplier has also pushed the prices up on you because of the gasoline shortage?” I asked sarcastically. No- supplies cost the same for him- he has not needed to stock up yet. But this is how he explained it: his car takes 60 liters of gasoline. It needs to be refueled every 2-3 days. The official price of gasoline was 50 Iraqi dinars before, so it cost him around 3000 dinars to fill up his car, which was nearly two dollars. Now it costs 9000 Iraqi dinars IF he fills it up at a gas station and not using black market gasoline which will cost him around 15,000 dinars- five times the former price- and this every two to three days. He also has to purchase extra gasoline for the shop generator which needs to be working almost constantly, now that electricity is about four hours daily. “Now how am I supposed to cover that increase in my costs if I don’t sell CDs at a higher price?”
People buy black market gasoline because for many, waiting in line five, six, seven… ten hours isn’t an option. We’ve worked out a sort of agreement amongst 4 or 5 houses in the neighborhood. According to a schedule (which is somewhat complicated and involves license plate numbers, number of children per family, etc.), one of us spends the day filling up the car and then the gasoline is distributed between the four or five involved neighbors.
The process of extracting the gasoline from the car itself once it is back at the house was a rather disgusting and unhealthy one up until nearly a year ago. A hose was inserted into the gasoline tank and one of they unlucky neighbors would suck on it until the first surge of gasoline came flowing out. Now, thanks to both local and Chinese ingenuity, we have miniature gasoline pumps to suck out the gasoline. “The man who invented these,” My cousin once declared emotionally, holding the pump up like a trophy, “deserves a Nobel Prize in… something or another.”
I know for most of the world, highly priced gasoline is a common concern. For Iraqis, it represents how the situation is deteriorating. Gasoline and kerosene were literally cheaper than bottled water prior to the war. It’s incredibly frustrating that while the price of petrol is at a high, one of the worlds leading oil-producing countries isn’t producing enough to cover its own needs.
There is talk of major mismanagement and theft in the Oil Ministry. Chalabi took over several days ago and a friend who works in the ministry says the takeover is a joke. “You know how they used to check our handbags when we first walked into the ministry?” She asked the day after Chalabi crowned himself Oil Emperor, “Now WE check our handbags after we leave the ministry- you know- to see if Chalabi stole anything.”
I guess the Iraqis who thought the US was going to turn Iraq into another America weren’t really far from the mark- we too now enjoy inane leaders, shady elections, a shaky economy, large-scale unemployment and soaring gas prices.
Goodbye 2005- the year of SCIRI, fraudulent elections, secret torture chambers, car bombs, white phosphorous, assassinations, sectarianism and fundamentalism… you will not be missed.
Let us see what 2006 has in store for us."-Riverbend on her blog.
''Gordon withdraws from 8th CD race''
Goldy on Horsesass.org has the scoop. Uniting behind one candidate early on can only help the Dems defeat Reichert. Defeating Reichert can only help the Dems take back the House in '06.
Wednesday, January 04, 2006
Phil Bows Out
"Phil Talmadge has announced that he will not be seeking the position of state party chair later this month. Remaining candidates include Dwight Pelz, Laura Ruderman (who addressed the 45th District Democrats tonight), Mark Hintz (chair of the Snohomish County party), Bill Harrington, and others. More details to follow shortly."-from Northwest Progressive Institute. Washblog also has "Phil Talmadge not running for chair" with some speculation already in the comments that "Phil said that he was going to keep working at his law practice if he became Chair. And I think we can all agree that the Chair's job is not a part-time gig."
"Newspapers Urge President to Quit"
"Outrageous, out of the question? Of course. Then again, here's what happened in the summer of 1998 when the president was named Clinton. Dozens of editorial pages clamored for him to quit (see this list). "He should resign," the Philadelphia Inquirer declared, "because his repeated, reckless deceits have dishonored his presidency beyond repair."
(January 03, 2006) -- What did "I" do? On Dec. 21, I wrote a little news story for this site about the sudden appearance of the "I" word -- impeachment, that is -- in reputable publications. The outrage over revelations about President Bush's approval of spying on Americans without a warrant was then at its height, before subsiding to its current level of what-will-they-think-of-next cynicism.
We got a lot of negative mail about that article, even though we didn't take a position on the matter, but simply pointed out that the "I" word was now being uttered in some surprising places (Barron's magazine?). Certainly, it's no "slam dunk" -- to coin a phrase -- that the president should be impeached, and most Democrats don't even want it to happen, either because they think they can make hay in the November elections with Bush still in office, and/or they fear a short but perhaps brutal reign of our own King Richard I.
Still, it amazes me when people make fun of the very notion that a president under a dark cloud might be asked to leave office, or given a push, in light of the very recent experience involving one William Jefferson Clinton. This seems especially poignant, in light of President Clinton leaving office with an approval rating over 60%, while the current occupant of the White House sits at around 40%. Then there's the perennial debate over the relative demerits of fooling around with an intern vs. fooling an entire country into going to war based on false evidence (and anything else you'd care to add on top of that).
In any case, while still not taking a position on impeachment, I thought it would be interesting to look back at how the press reacted to the Clinton Crisis of 1998. Did newspaper editorials condemn Clinton for his screwing around, and lying about it, and leave it at that, or did they come out squarely for his exit from office?
What follows, from an Associated Press rundown on September 15, 1998, is a long list of newspapers that "called for President Clinton's resignation." AP added that some of those listed "did so before the release of Kenneth Starr's report on Sept. 11."
Indeed, the Philadelphia Inquirer responded to the coming of the Starr report this way: "Bill Clinton should resign. He should resign because his repeated, reckless deceits have dishonored his presidency beyond repair."
The Los Angeles Times pointed out: "The picture of Clinton that now emerges is that of a middle-aged man with a pathetic inability to control his sexual fancies."
The New York Times, on its Howell Raines-led editorial page, thundered that until the Starr turn, "no citizen ... could have grasped the completeness of President Clinton's mendacity or the magnitude of his recklessness." Yet a Washington Post poll that month showed that while a majority of Americans wanted Congress to censure Clinton, they did not want it to boot him out of office.
Here is that AP partial list of newspapers calling for Clinton to quit (other papers no doubt joined in later):
NATIONAL:
USA Today
ALABAMA:
The Mobile Register
Montgomery Advertiser
ARIZONA:
Tucson Citizen
CALIFORNIA:
San Jose Mercury News
The Orange County Register
The North (San Diego) County Times
The Record, Stockton
COLORADO:
The Denver Post
CONNECTICUT:
The Day of New London
Norwich Bulletin
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
The Washington Times
FLORIDA:
The Orlando Sentinel
The Tampa Tribune
GEORGIA:
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
The Augusta Chronicle
ILLINOIS:
Chicago Tribune
INDIANA:
The Indianapolis Star
Chronicle-Tribune of Marion
South Bend Tribune
The Times of Northwest Indiana
IOWA:
The Des Moines Register
KANSAS:
The Topeka Capital-Journal
LOUISIANA:
The Times-Picayune of New Orleans
The News-Star, Monroe
MICHIGAN:
The Grand Rapids Press
Detroit Free Press
MINNESOTA:
Post-Bulletin of Rochester
MISSISSIPPI:
Northeast Mississippi Daily Journal, Tupelo
MISSOURI:
Jefferson City News-Tribune
NEBRASKA:
Lincoln Journal Star
NEVADA:
Reno Gazette-Journal
NEW JERSEY
The Trentonian, Trenton
NEW MEXICO:
Albuquerque Journal
The Santa Fe New Mexican
NEW YORK:
Sunday Freeman of Kingston
Utica Observer-Dispatch
NORTH CAROLINA:
The Herald-Sun of Durham
Winston-Salem Journal
OHIO:
The Repository, Canton
The Cincinnati Enquirer
The Cincinnati Post
OKLAHOMA:
The Daily Oklahoman, Oklahoma City
Tulsa World
OREGON:
Statesman Journal, Salem
PENNSYLVANIA:
The Philadelphia Inquirer
The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
SOUTH CAROLINA:
The State, Columbia
SOUTH DAKOTA:
Argus Leader, Sioux Falls
TEXAS:
San Antonio Express-News
El Paso Times
UTAH:
Standard-Examiner, Ogden
The Spectrum, St. George
The Salt Lake Tribune, Salt Lake City
Deseret News, Salt Lake City
VIRGINIA:
Daily Press of Newport News
WASHINGTON:
The Seattle Times
WISCONSIN:
The Post-Crescent, Appleton
The Journal Times, Racine."
-from the column in Editor&Publisher by the editor, Greg Mitchell.
(January 03, 2006) -- What did "I" do? On Dec. 21, I wrote a little news story for this site about the sudden appearance of the "I" word -- impeachment, that is -- in reputable publications. The outrage over revelations about President Bush's approval of spying on Americans without a warrant was then at its height, before subsiding to its current level of what-will-they-think-of-next cynicism.
We got a lot of negative mail about that article, even though we didn't take a position on the matter, but simply pointed out that the "I" word was now being uttered in some surprising places (Barron's magazine?). Certainly, it's no "slam dunk" -- to coin a phrase -- that the president should be impeached, and most Democrats don't even want it to happen, either because they think they can make hay in the November elections with Bush still in office, and/or they fear a short but perhaps brutal reign of our own King Richard I.
Still, it amazes me when people make fun of the very notion that a president under a dark cloud might be asked to leave office, or given a push, in light of the very recent experience involving one William Jefferson Clinton. This seems especially poignant, in light of President Clinton leaving office with an approval rating over 60%, while the current occupant of the White House sits at around 40%. Then there's the perennial debate over the relative demerits of fooling around with an intern vs. fooling an entire country into going to war based on false evidence (and anything else you'd care to add on top of that).
In any case, while still not taking a position on impeachment, I thought it would be interesting to look back at how the press reacted to the Clinton Crisis of 1998. Did newspaper editorials condemn Clinton for his screwing around, and lying about it, and leave it at that, or did they come out squarely for his exit from office?
What follows, from an Associated Press rundown on September 15, 1998, is a long list of newspapers that "called for President Clinton's resignation." AP added that some of those listed "did so before the release of Kenneth Starr's report on Sept. 11."
Indeed, the Philadelphia Inquirer responded to the coming of the Starr report this way: "Bill Clinton should resign. He should resign because his repeated, reckless deceits have dishonored his presidency beyond repair."
The Los Angeles Times pointed out: "The picture of Clinton that now emerges is that of a middle-aged man with a pathetic inability to control his sexual fancies."
The New York Times, on its Howell Raines-led editorial page, thundered that until the Starr turn, "no citizen ... could have grasped the completeness of President Clinton's mendacity or the magnitude of his recklessness." Yet a Washington Post poll that month showed that while a majority of Americans wanted Congress to censure Clinton, they did not want it to boot him out of office.
Here is that AP partial list of newspapers calling for Clinton to quit (other papers no doubt joined in later):
NATIONAL:
USA Today
ALABAMA:
The Mobile Register
Montgomery Advertiser
ARIZONA:
Tucson Citizen
CALIFORNIA:
San Jose Mercury News
The Orange County Register
The North (San Diego) County Times
The Record, Stockton
COLORADO:
The Denver Post
CONNECTICUT:
The Day of New London
Norwich Bulletin
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
The Washington Times
FLORIDA:
The Orlando Sentinel
The Tampa Tribune
GEORGIA:
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
The Augusta Chronicle
ILLINOIS:
Chicago Tribune
INDIANA:
The Indianapolis Star
Chronicle-Tribune of Marion
South Bend Tribune
The Times of Northwest Indiana
IOWA:
The Des Moines Register
KANSAS:
The Topeka Capital-Journal
LOUISIANA:
The Times-Picayune of New Orleans
The News-Star, Monroe
MICHIGAN:
The Grand Rapids Press
Detroit Free Press
MINNESOTA:
Post-Bulletin of Rochester
MISSISSIPPI:
Northeast Mississippi Daily Journal, Tupelo
MISSOURI:
Jefferson City News-Tribune
NEBRASKA:
Lincoln Journal Star
NEVADA:
Reno Gazette-Journal
NEW JERSEY
The Trentonian, Trenton
NEW MEXICO:
Albuquerque Journal
The Santa Fe New Mexican
NEW YORK:
Sunday Freeman of Kingston
Utica Observer-Dispatch
NORTH CAROLINA:
The Herald-Sun of Durham
Winston-Salem Journal
OHIO:
The Repository, Canton
The Cincinnati Enquirer
The Cincinnati Post
OKLAHOMA:
The Daily Oklahoman, Oklahoma City
Tulsa World
OREGON:
Statesman Journal, Salem
PENNSYLVANIA:
The Philadelphia Inquirer
The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
SOUTH CAROLINA:
The State, Columbia
SOUTH DAKOTA:
Argus Leader, Sioux Falls
TEXAS:
San Antonio Express-News
El Paso Times
UTAH:
Standard-Examiner, Ogden
The Spectrum, St. George
The Salt Lake Tribune, Salt Lake City
Deseret News, Salt Lake City
VIRGINIA:
Daily Press of Newport News
WASHINGTON:
The Seattle Times
WISCONSIN:
The Post-Crescent, Appleton
The Journal Times, Racine."
-from the column in Editor&Publisher by the editor, Greg Mitchell.
''The DNC's record fundraising year''
"Hotline on Call reports:
"The Democratic National Committee raised more than $51M in 2005, a record for an off-year and twenty percent higher than the comparable period in 2003."
20 percent higher than the year before a presidential election? I bet it's much higher than in 2001, which is truly the "comparable period". And, let's not forget that Dean couldn't solicit the million-dollar soft-dollar donations that made up the bulk of the pre-2004 DNC.
Now, of course, the RNC blew those numbers away -- $100 million -- but that was to be expected. Republicans always outraise Democrats. The question is whether Democrats can work toward closing that gap. And Dean has shown that he can bring in the bucks at an unprecedented rate despite facing more obstacles to raising that money than ever before.
Update: I forgot to mention -- when Dean goes on fundraising trips to the states he lets the locals keep the money. He's raising money for the state parties, which isn't reflected in these numbers. The state parties love him for it. In the past, people like McAuliffe would come in and vaccum up money from the locals and send it to DC. This makes these numbers all that much more remarkable."-by Kos on Kos.
Update: Kos updates the story with a new post, "The Dean misinformation campaign."
"The Democratic National Committee raised more than $51M in 2005, a record for an off-year and twenty percent higher than the comparable period in 2003."
20 percent higher than the year before a presidential election? I bet it's much higher than in 2001, which is truly the "comparable period". And, let's not forget that Dean couldn't solicit the million-dollar soft-dollar donations that made up the bulk of the pre-2004 DNC.
Now, of course, the RNC blew those numbers away -- $100 million -- but that was to be expected. Republicans always outraise Democrats. The question is whether Democrats can work toward closing that gap. And Dean has shown that he can bring in the bucks at an unprecedented rate despite facing more obstacles to raising that money than ever before.
Update: I forgot to mention -- when Dean goes on fundraising trips to the states he lets the locals keep the money. He's raising money for the state parties, which isn't reflected in these numbers. The state parties love him for it. In the past, people like McAuliffe would come in and vaccum up money from the locals and send it to DC. This makes these numbers all that much more remarkable."-by Kos on Kos.
Update: Kos updates the story with a new post, "The Dean misinformation campaign."
Tuesday, January 03, 2006
''ACLU Ad: The President Lied to the American People and Broke the Law''
Check out the ad the ACLU ran in The New York Times, connecting the actions of Richard Nixon and George W. Bush.
Thanks to Cliff Sloane for passing this along (from Thailand!).
Thanks to Cliff Sloane for passing this along (from Thailand!).
''What about Alito?''
"We now know that George Bush personally ordered American intelligence services to spy on American citizens without the consent of any court and repeatedly directed officials to take actions that explicitly violated the law. Our courts are the last line of defense against abuses of power like this, and every judicial nominee must demonstrate that they will honor their most important responsibility: protecting our rights and freedoms.
Samuel Alito will not.
During the course of his judicial career, Samuel Alito has compiled a record of looking the other way when abuses of power threaten our basic freedoms. He has deferred to unscrupulous prosecutors who constructed all-white juries to try black defendants. He repeatedly failed to protect our right to privacy. He was even the lone judge voting to uphold the illegal strip-search of a 10-year old girl.
Next week Judge Alito's confirmation hearings will begin. Already over 750,000 people have signed a petition asking Senators to oppose Alito -- today I add my name.
Please join me.
A broad coalition of groups will deliver this petition to Senators in less than 48 hours. You and I have the chance to push the total over a million if we spread the word.
Moderate Republicans who have expressed concern about the domestic spying program also have serious questions about Judge Alito, and an outpouring from ordinary Americans could force them to do the right thing and vote against him.
Even before the domestic spying story broke, Senators in both parties had expressed concern about Judge Alito's credibility. On everything from his ideological streaks to his rulings in cases where he had a clear conflict of interest, Judge Alito seems to be willing to say whatever it takes to get confirmed. After bragging about his membership in an ultra-conservative group on his college campus to boost his right-wing credentials, he's now waffling on exactly what his relationship with the group was. And he explicitly broke a promise he made under oath to the Senate that he would recuse himself from cases where he had a personal financial interest.
Across the country more and more people are realizing that if Judge Alito is confirmed, the impact on our rights and our lives will be felt for generations.
Join the drive for a million people calling on the Senate to reject the Alito nomination.
Judge Alito's record of currying favor with the extreme right and favoring government power over individual liberties might make him qualified as a favorite speaker at conservative think tanks, but it does not qualify him to sit on the Supreme Court.
People who put politics over the rule of law cannot be trusted to guard our freedoms. Every American should shudder at the prospect of a judge with a history of ethical lapses and appeasing right-wing extremists getting a lifetime appointment to the highest court in the land.
Send a message to Senators now and join the 750,000 Americans speaking out against this dangerous nomination.
The Senate must reject Samuel Alito.
Thank you.
Governor Howard Dean, M.D."-from his email today.
Samuel Alito will not.
During the course of his judicial career, Samuel Alito has compiled a record of looking the other way when abuses of power threaten our basic freedoms. He has deferred to unscrupulous prosecutors who constructed all-white juries to try black defendants. He repeatedly failed to protect our right to privacy. He was even the lone judge voting to uphold the illegal strip-search of a 10-year old girl.
Next week Judge Alito's confirmation hearings will begin. Already over 750,000 people have signed a petition asking Senators to oppose Alito -- today I add my name.
Please join me.
A broad coalition of groups will deliver this petition to Senators in less than 48 hours. You and I have the chance to push the total over a million if we spread the word.
Moderate Republicans who have expressed concern about the domestic spying program also have serious questions about Judge Alito, and an outpouring from ordinary Americans could force them to do the right thing and vote against him.
Even before the domestic spying story broke, Senators in both parties had expressed concern about Judge Alito's credibility. On everything from his ideological streaks to his rulings in cases where he had a clear conflict of interest, Judge Alito seems to be willing to say whatever it takes to get confirmed. After bragging about his membership in an ultra-conservative group on his college campus to boost his right-wing credentials, he's now waffling on exactly what his relationship with the group was. And he explicitly broke a promise he made under oath to the Senate that he would recuse himself from cases where he had a personal financial interest.
Across the country more and more people are realizing that if Judge Alito is confirmed, the impact on our rights and our lives will be felt for generations.
Join the drive for a million people calling on the Senate to reject the Alito nomination.
Judge Alito's record of currying favor with the extreme right and favoring government power over individual liberties might make him qualified as a favorite speaker at conservative think tanks, but it does not qualify him to sit on the Supreme Court.
People who put politics over the rule of law cannot be trusted to guard our freedoms. Every American should shudder at the prospect of a judge with a history of ethical lapses and appeasing right-wing extremists getting a lifetime appointment to the highest court in the land.
Send a message to Senators now and join the 750,000 Americans speaking out against this dangerous nomination.
The Senate must reject Samuel Alito.
Thank you.
Governor Howard Dean, M.D."-from his email today.
''NW Progressive Institute Presents: 2005 David Neiwert Awards''
We get chopped liver again, but here they are:
"Best Monitoring of Right Wing Media
RECIPIENT: MICHAEL HOOD OF BLATHERWATCH
In the conclusion of his book, The Republican Noise Machine, Media Matters President and CEO David Brock wrote the following: "The situation I have described in The Republican Noise Machine is intolerable in a democracy. It is well past time that concerned citizens organize to redress it." As Brock pointed out, keeping tabs on right wing media (especially conservative talk radio) is critically important. And nobody in the Pacific Northwest does it better than Michael Hood of blatherWatch, who diligently, patiently, and humorously chronicled developments in talk radio this year (both regionally and nationally). In 2005, blatherWatch was often first to break an important story, like the recent arrest of 710 KIRO host Mike Webb, days before traditional media outlets picked up on it. Simply put, this blog is an invaluable resource for anyone who wants to follow conservative talk radio but doesn't actually want to listen to it (in fact, blatherWatch's slogan is "listening to talk radio so you don't have to..."). Our thanks to Michael Hood for filling a huge void and helping to enlighten us about this often underestimated medium.
Best Humor/Satire
RECIPIENT: GENERAL J.C. CHRISTIAN, PATRIOT, OF JESUS' GENERAL
If you're looking for some of the best snark, humor, and satirical takes on America's most controversial issues, look no further than Jesus' General, "an 11 on the manly scale of absolute gender." General J.C. Christian, Patriot, offers continual and biting commentary on everything from civil rights injustices to foreign policy blunders, through his "Republican Jesus" cartoons, and his satirical letters, usually signed "Heterosexually yours". The General has mastered the art of making the nation's radical Republicans look completely ridiculous while pretending to be one of them. Keep up the good work, J.C.!
Best In-State Political Coverage from Out of the State
RECIPIENTS: CARLA OF PREEMPTIVE KARMA AND T.J. OF ALSO ALSO
One of the major political events in the region this year - perhaps the biggest political event of the year - was the Washington State Republican Party's attempt to unseat Gov. Christine Gregoire by challenging the outcome of the 2004 gubernatorial election. The GOP's legal challenge was accompanied by a public relations firestorm that sought to paint Gregoire and the state's Democrats as cheaters who had stuffed ballot boxes and committed fraud in order to win the election. Washington State's progressive bloggers fought back against such mistruths, but they had help from two outstanding peers from Oregon - Carla of Preemptive Karma and T.J. of Also Also. Over a period of several months, Carla and T.J. worked tirelessly to help debunk the misinformation that was being spread by the Republicans' media campaign, exposing the truth about military ballots, voting tabulation, and other issues. Additionally, Also Also provided excellent analysis of the trial that took place at the end of the election challenge. Washingtonian progressives owe these two Oregonians their sincere thanks for a job well done.
Best Interviews
RECIPIENT: LYNN ALLEN OF EVERGREEN POLITICS
The regional progressive blogosphere is fortunate to have an interviewer (Lynn Allen) who cares deeply about working with other people and listening to what they have to say. This interest was plainly evident in Lynn's outstanding series of interviews this year. We commend her for helping to build better relationships between bloggers, activists, and elected officials. Some of the people Lynn interviewed this year include Governor Christine Gregoire, Senate Majority Leader Lisa Brown, newly elected Snohomish County Councilman Dave Somers, Geni Hawkins (a candidate for King County Council), Al Runte (candidate for Mayor of Seattle), Rob Dolin (who in 2005 was elected Secretary of the Young Democrats of America), SEIU Local 775 President David Rolf, Dean Nielsen of Progressive Majority Washington, all of the candidates who ran for state party chair last January, and NPI Executive Director Andrew Villeneuve. That's amazing! We hope to see more interviews from Lynn in 2006.
Best Series
RECIPIENT: DANIEL KIRKDORFFER OF ON THE ROAD TO 2008
While NPI's own Official Blog was running a succession of "Disaster Picture of the Week" posts to highlight the dangers of passing Initiative 912 (and thereby crippling funding for safe roads), Daniel Kirkdorffer of On the Road to 2008 was putting together a series of his own. During the month of October 2005, Dan published numerous installments in his "Focus On I-912 GOP Opposition" series, underlining the fact that opposition to Initiative 912 was bipartisan. Dan took a look at Republicans who publicly declared their opposition to the anti-transportation initiative. His thoughtful observations were picked up around the progressive blogosphere and even in traditional media: reporter Jerry Cornfield from the Everett Herald mentioned Dan's work in an article that ran in the newspaper in late October. Besides his "Focus on..." series, Dan also wrote a brilliant response to a GOP activist's arguments for I-912 which is widely regarded as perhaps his best post. We hope to see more of this energy from Dan in 2006.
Best Muckraking Award
RECIPIENT: DAVID GOLDSTEIN OF HORSESASS
The author of one of the region's most widely read blogs repeatedly proved this year that investigative reporting isn't just for traditional media outlets. In 2004, David Goldstein showed he wasn't afraid of corporate behemoth Great Canadian Gaming when he published an exclusive piece on his blog about the company's shady practices and illicit activities. David spent the first half of 2005 providing exhaustive analysis of the gubernatorial election challenge. But it was in the second half of 2005 that he really made a difference. Early in September, during the midst of Hurricane Katrina, David broke the news that Bush appointee Michael Brown, who was put in charge of FEMA, had been previously forced to resign as the "Judges and Stewards Commissioner" for the International Arabian Horse Association. After he posted the news to Daily Kos, traditional media outlets quickly followed up and began exposing Brown's past. The negative publicity soon led to Brown's resignation. If that wasn't enough, David followed this up a month later by publishing a devastating report on the family troubles of David Irons, the GOP's candidate for King County Executive. The account was quickly picked up by the Seattle Post-Intelligencer and several Seattle television news stations, which repeatedly covered the story. Irons later lost his bid for country executive, failing to capture even 40% of the vote. How many bloggers can say they helped to bring down a Bush crony AND played a major role in the defeat of a major GOP bid to take over one of the nation's largest counties? David Goldstein can.
Best News Digest
RECIPIENT: CARL BALLARD OF THE WASHINGTON STATE POLITICAL REPORT
Want a quick recap of what's happening around the state and the Pacific Northwest? You'd better head straight on over to Carl Ballard's Washington State Political Report. The Report undoubtedly provides the regional progressive blogosphere's best news digest, with frequent links to what other blogs and traditional media outlets are covering, as well as brief commentary from Carl and his guest bloggers. Even better, the Report is easy to read and covers developments and news items that are often ignored by other progressive bloggers. Our thanks to Carl Ballard for continually and reliably delivering such a great abstract of local political news and views.
Best Legislative Coverage
RECIPIENT: OLYSCOOP
During the 2005 legislative session, OlyScoop was the place to find reality-based commentary and reporting on the happenings in Washington State's Capital City - especially in the Washington State Legislature. OlyScoop tracked the progress of several bills during the session, including the Mental Health Parity bill, State Rep. Ed Murray's civil rights bill, and the 2005 Transportation Package. OlyScoop also alerted the local progressive blogopshere to the Olympian's series of Capitol Chats and provided insightful commentary on a host of issues. Though OlyScoop stopped posting in July, we're hoping he'll be back online to cover the 2006 legislative session.
Best Community Driven Blogs
RECIPIENTS: BLUEOREGON, 43RD STATE BLUES, AND WASHBLOG
Three Pacific Northwest blogs emerged in 2005 as leaders in building community driven sites that are open to multiple contributors: Blue Oregon, Washblog, and 43rd State Blues (Idaho). The strength of each one of these three blogs lies not with its founder or one main writer, but with a whole group of contributors who regularly share their unique perspectives. 43rd State Blues (which runs on Drupal) is currently the only one of these three blogs that allows readers to create their own user account so they can become a contributor. However, Washblog is about to become the second. It's moving over to Scoop, the same system that powers Daily Kos - the Web's biggest progressive community. While Blue Oregon doesn't run on Scoop or Drupal, it does have several dozen contributors from across the state, and its founders invite visitors to "Post a comment, think out loud, get into the rough and tumble." Each one of these three blogs is truly driven by a community of caring progressives.
Most Valuable Local Coverage
RECIPIENTS: JULIE FANSELOW OF RED STATE REBELS AND JIMMY MCCABE OF MCCRANIUM
If you take a survey of most of the regional progressive blogosphere, you'll find that most people are blogging from in and around the Seattle or Portland metropolitan areas, which are the Pacific Northwest's two biggest urban centers. Despite this trend, there are a number of bloggers living outside of these two urban centers who have managed to set up shop on the Net and are offering important coverage of their communities. Two of the most valuable blogs the regional blogosphere has are Red State Rebels and McCranium. The first, Red State Rebels, is run by Julie Fanselow out of Boise, Idaho, and has been "resisting conservative extremism since 2003". Scroll down the page and you'll read about everything from local grocery powerhouse Albertsons to what's happening with the local Drinking Liberally chapter, and a lot more. McCranium, based out of the Tri-Cities in Washington State, is styled as "A Little Opinion from Eastern Washington". In recent months, its author, Jimmy McCabe, has written about the 2006 4th Congressional District race, why Western Washington needs the eastern part of the state, and provided a local perspective on the dangers of passing Initiative 912, which thankfully failed in November. For their efforts, these two bloggers are awarded the Most Valuable Local Coverage Award.
Finally...A Word of Encouragement
TO BLOGGERS WHO DID NOT RECEIVE AN AWARD
Obviously, it's impossible for us to honor every single blogger in the regional progressive blogosphere at once...there are just too many good blogs with good people behind them. The Regional Blogs Directory on Pacific Northwest Portal currently stands at 214 progressive blogs from four NW states. That's a lot. And the directory is only going to get bigger, because there are good blogs out there that we haven't listed yet, and new blogs will be created.
If you didn't get recognized with an award for 2005, there's no reason to feel disappointed. If you're a progressive and you're blogging, you're already a winner, because you've taken your activism to a whole new level. Stay committed. Pick an issue or a campaign in the new year and resolve to work as hard as you can to change this nation for the better.
Let us know what you're up to - tell us what you're doing to make a difference. The more involved you are in these next twelve months, the more likely you'll be recognized with an award a year from now. Remain focused and keep blogging. Your nation, your region, your state, and your community need you.
Follow this link for the Permanent Home for the Awards."-from the post on Kos.
I would like to personally thank The Academy (Andrew) for overlooking me so I can retain my edgy, underground status. As F. Scott Fitzgerald said, "In America, nothing fails like success."
"Best Monitoring of Right Wing Media
RECIPIENT: MICHAEL HOOD OF BLATHERWATCH
In the conclusion of his book, The Republican Noise Machine, Media Matters President and CEO David Brock wrote the following: "The situation I have described in The Republican Noise Machine is intolerable in a democracy. It is well past time that concerned citizens organize to redress it." As Brock pointed out, keeping tabs on right wing media (especially conservative talk radio) is critically important. And nobody in the Pacific Northwest does it better than Michael Hood of blatherWatch, who diligently, patiently, and humorously chronicled developments in talk radio this year (both regionally and nationally). In 2005, blatherWatch was often first to break an important story, like the recent arrest of 710 KIRO host Mike Webb, days before traditional media outlets picked up on it. Simply put, this blog is an invaluable resource for anyone who wants to follow conservative talk radio but doesn't actually want to listen to it (in fact, blatherWatch's slogan is "listening to talk radio so you don't have to..."). Our thanks to Michael Hood for filling a huge void and helping to enlighten us about this often underestimated medium.
Best Humor/Satire
RECIPIENT: GENERAL J.C. CHRISTIAN, PATRIOT, OF JESUS' GENERAL
If you're looking for some of the best snark, humor, and satirical takes on America's most controversial issues, look no further than Jesus' General, "an 11 on the manly scale of absolute gender." General J.C. Christian, Patriot, offers continual and biting commentary on everything from civil rights injustices to foreign policy blunders, through his "Republican Jesus" cartoons, and his satirical letters, usually signed "Heterosexually yours". The General has mastered the art of making the nation's radical Republicans look completely ridiculous while pretending to be one of them. Keep up the good work, J.C.!
Best In-State Political Coverage from Out of the State
RECIPIENTS: CARLA OF PREEMPTIVE KARMA AND T.J. OF ALSO ALSO
One of the major political events in the region this year - perhaps the biggest political event of the year - was the Washington State Republican Party's attempt to unseat Gov. Christine Gregoire by challenging the outcome of the 2004 gubernatorial election. The GOP's legal challenge was accompanied by a public relations firestorm that sought to paint Gregoire and the state's Democrats as cheaters who had stuffed ballot boxes and committed fraud in order to win the election. Washington State's progressive bloggers fought back against such mistruths, but they had help from two outstanding peers from Oregon - Carla of Preemptive Karma and T.J. of Also Also. Over a period of several months, Carla and T.J. worked tirelessly to help debunk the misinformation that was being spread by the Republicans' media campaign, exposing the truth about military ballots, voting tabulation, and other issues. Additionally, Also Also provided excellent analysis of the trial that took place at the end of the election challenge. Washingtonian progressives owe these two Oregonians their sincere thanks for a job well done.
Best Interviews
RECIPIENT: LYNN ALLEN OF EVERGREEN POLITICS
The regional progressive blogosphere is fortunate to have an interviewer (Lynn Allen) who cares deeply about working with other people and listening to what they have to say. This interest was plainly evident in Lynn's outstanding series of interviews this year. We commend her for helping to build better relationships between bloggers, activists, and elected officials. Some of the people Lynn interviewed this year include Governor Christine Gregoire, Senate Majority Leader Lisa Brown, newly elected Snohomish County Councilman Dave Somers, Geni Hawkins (a candidate for King County Council), Al Runte (candidate for Mayor of Seattle), Rob Dolin (who in 2005 was elected Secretary of the Young Democrats of America), SEIU Local 775 President David Rolf, Dean Nielsen of Progressive Majority Washington, all of the candidates who ran for state party chair last January, and NPI Executive Director Andrew Villeneuve. That's amazing! We hope to see more interviews from Lynn in 2006.
Best Series
RECIPIENT: DANIEL KIRKDORFFER OF ON THE ROAD TO 2008
While NPI's own Official Blog was running a succession of "Disaster Picture of the Week" posts to highlight the dangers of passing Initiative 912 (and thereby crippling funding for safe roads), Daniel Kirkdorffer of On the Road to 2008 was putting together a series of his own. During the month of October 2005, Dan published numerous installments in his "Focus On I-912 GOP Opposition" series, underlining the fact that opposition to Initiative 912 was bipartisan. Dan took a look at Republicans who publicly declared their opposition to the anti-transportation initiative. His thoughtful observations were picked up around the progressive blogosphere and even in traditional media: reporter Jerry Cornfield from the Everett Herald mentioned Dan's work in an article that ran in the newspaper in late October. Besides his "Focus on..." series, Dan also wrote a brilliant response to a GOP activist's arguments for I-912 which is widely regarded as perhaps his best post. We hope to see more of this energy from Dan in 2006.
Best Muckraking Award
RECIPIENT: DAVID GOLDSTEIN OF HORSESASS
The author of one of the region's most widely read blogs repeatedly proved this year that investigative reporting isn't just for traditional media outlets. In 2004, David Goldstein showed he wasn't afraid of corporate behemoth Great Canadian Gaming when he published an exclusive piece on his blog about the company's shady practices and illicit activities. David spent the first half of 2005 providing exhaustive analysis of the gubernatorial election challenge. But it was in the second half of 2005 that he really made a difference. Early in September, during the midst of Hurricane Katrina, David broke the news that Bush appointee Michael Brown, who was put in charge of FEMA, had been previously forced to resign as the "Judges and Stewards Commissioner" for the International Arabian Horse Association. After he posted the news to Daily Kos, traditional media outlets quickly followed up and began exposing Brown's past. The negative publicity soon led to Brown's resignation. If that wasn't enough, David followed this up a month later by publishing a devastating report on the family troubles of David Irons, the GOP's candidate for King County Executive. The account was quickly picked up by the Seattle Post-Intelligencer and several Seattle television news stations, which repeatedly covered the story. Irons later lost his bid for country executive, failing to capture even 40% of the vote. How many bloggers can say they helped to bring down a Bush crony AND played a major role in the defeat of a major GOP bid to take over one of the nation's largest counties? David Goldstein can.
Best News Digest
RECIPIENT: CARL BALLARD OF THE WASHINGTON STATE POLITICAL REPORT
Want a quick recap of what's happening around the state and the Pacific Northwest? You'd better head straight on over to Carl Ballard's Washington State Political Report. The Report undoubtedly provides the regional progressive blogosphere's best news digest, with frequent links to what other blogs and traditional media outlets are covering, as well as brief commentary from Carl and his guest bloggers. Even better, the Report is easy to read and covers developments and news items that are often ignored by other progressive bloggers. Our thanks to Carl Ballard for continually and reliably delivering such a great abstract of local political news and views.
Best Legislative Coverage
RECIPIENT: OLYSCOOP
During the 2005 legislative session, OlyScoop was the place to find reality-based commentary and reporting on the happenings in Washington State's Capital City - especially in the Washington State Legislature. OlyScoop tracked the progress of several bills during the session, including the Mental Health Parity bill, State Rep. Ed Murray's civil rights bill, and the 2005 Transportation Package. OlyScoop also alerted the local progressive blogopshere to the Olympian's series of Capitol Chats and provided insightful commentary on a host of issues. Though OlyScoop stopped posting in July, we're hoping he'll be back online to cover the 2006 legislative session.
Best Community Driven Blogs
RECIPIENTS: BLUEOREGON, 43RD STATE BLUES, AND WASHBLOG
Three Pacific Northwest blogs emerged in 2005 as leaders in building community driven sites that are open to multiple contributors: Blue Oregon, Washblog, and 43rd State Blues (Idaho). The strength of each one of these three blogs lies not with its founder or one main writer, but with a whole group of contributors who regularly share their unique perspectives. 43rd State Blues (which runs on Drupal) is currently the only one of these three blogs that allows readers to create their own user account so they can become a contributor. However, Washblog is about to become the second. It's moving over to Scoop, the same system that powers Daily Kos - the Web's biggest progressive community. While Blue Oregon doesn't run on Scoop or Drupal, it does have several dozen contributors from across the state, and its founders invite visitors to "Post a comment, think out loud, get into the rough and tumble." Each one of these three blogs is truly driven by a community of caring progressives.
Most Valuable Local Coverage
RECIPIENTS: JULIE FANSELOW OF RED STATE REBELS AND JIMMY MCCABE OF MCCRANIUM
If you take a survey of most of the regional progressive blogosphere, you'll find that most people are blogging from in and around the Seattle or Portland metropolitan areas, which are the Pacific Northwest's two biggest urban centers. Despite this trend, there are a number of bloggers living outside of these two urban centers who have managed to set up shop on the Net and are offering important coverage of their communities. Two of the most valuable blogs the regional blogosphere has are Red State Rebels and McCranium. The first, Red State Rebels, is run by Julie Fanselow out of Boise, Idaho, and has been "resisting conservative extremism since 2003". Scroll down the page and you'll read about everything from local grocery powerhouse Albertsons to what's happening with the local Drinking Liberally chapter, and a lot more. McCranium, based out of the Tri-Cities in Washington State, is styled as "A Little Opinion from Eastern Washington". In recent months, its author, Jimmy McCabe, has written about the 2006 4th Congressional District race, why Western Washington needs the eastern part of the state, and provided a local perspective on the dangers of passing Initiative 912, which thankfully failed in November. For their efforts, these two bloggers are awarded the Most Valuable Local Coverage Award.
Finally...A Word of Encouragement
TO BLOGGERS WHO DID NOT RECEIVE AN AWARD
Obviously, it's impossible for us to honor every single blogger in the regional progressive blogosphere at once...there are just too many good blogs with good people behind them. The Regional Blogs Directory on Pacific Northwest Portal currently stands at 214 progressive blogs from four NW states. That's a lot. And the directory is only going to get bigger, because there are good blogs out there that we haven't listed yet, and new blogs will be created.
If you didn't get recognized with an award for 2005, there's no reason to feel disappointed. If you're a progressive and you're blogging, you're already a winner, because you've taken your activism to a whole new level. Stay committed. Pick an issue or a campaign in the new year and resolve to work as hard as you can to change this nation for the better.
Let us know what you're up to - tell us what you're doing to make a difference. The more involved you are in these next twelve months, the more likely you'll be recognized with an award a year from now. Remain focused and keep blogging. Your nation, your region, your state, and your community need you.
Follow this link for the Permanent Home for the Awards."-from the post on Kos.
I would like to personally thank The Academy (Andrew) for overlooking me so I can retain my edgy, underground status. As F. Scott Fitzgerald said, "In America, nothing fails like success."
Monday, January 02, 2006
''On race, fairness, and leadership''
"Continuing the discussion Noemie began about David Postman's recent article about the State Party Chair race, I think it's time to talk about race and dispel some rumors. To begin, I want to reprint a letter that a friend wrote. Lawrence is one of the more brilliant people I know, who tends to disarm with humor, but when engaged is capable of cutting through deep lines of bullshit to grab onto an issue and bring it to full light. With his permission, his letter in its entirety:
"Dear Friends--
Over the weekend I read an article in the Seattle Times wherein State Senator Margarita Prentice implied that State Party Chair candidate Dwight Pelz might be "racist" because he has run against people of color in the past.
Now, we've all dealt with the press, and know how easy it is to have one's views misrepresented. I would like to think that has happened here and that Senator Prentice's statements have been turned into something they were originally not. I have spoken with Senator Prentice on the phone in the past, during the Dean campaign, and I know that she is a wise and thoughtful person.
However, because the article spun her position the way that it did, I've been thinking about what the implications are. Several things strike me:
First, Dwight Pelz lives in the 37th Legislative District, one of the most diverse districts in the state. When he was on the King County Council, he was required to run in the King County Council district that encompassed the 37th , as the KC Council, unlike the Seattle City Council, is a districted body. His choice of opponents was not at his discretion.
Second, when a choice of opponents was available to him during his race for the Seattle City Council, he ran against Richard McIver, an African American, not because of McIver's skin color, but because he felt McIver was vulnerable for having missed so many council meetings of importance. It should be noted that if the Seattle City Council were a districted body, Pelz's opponent would have been---Richard McIver.
Finally, I'd like to raise a more ephemeral but insidious concept. What is the true nature of racism when it presumes that all candidates are not equal, and that candidates of color have a right not to be challenged?
We are a majority white, middle-class body. We all hold the concept of diversity dear. This is a difficult issue to tackle, for it treads on old hurts that rightfully still sting.
But do we believe that Dwight Pelz, or any other candidate, must not oppose other candidates from his own neighborhoods and communities because they have different skin tones? I don't think we do, and I'd urge you to consider carefully what conclusions you draw from this article, and what opinions we might or might not spread as its result.
Thanks for reading!
~Lawrence"
Let's get something out in the open:
The leading candidates are not perfect people. Dwight Pelz can be direct, to a fault. Laura Ruderman can be abrasive. Phil Talmadge can be a dirty campaigner. And none of these things matter - the question is not whose company we prefer, but who will most effectively organize and fundraise and advance the message for our Party. And on those two questions, Dwight and Phil have rightfully risen to the forefront of the discussions.
I'm not sure what Senator Prentice's real issues with Dwight are - I hope Lawrence will let me know when he hears from her, and I hope he's right that Postman misrepresented her. But she's not the first to make this suggestion, and I take a less eloquent view of the issue than Lawrence: to me, it's just stupid. We might as well accuse Mark Wilson of being sexist because he keeps running against women.
I've watched Dwight interact with the public in small group settings, large rallies and parades, and one thing he is not is racially insensitive. The 37th has elected seven people of color to the state legislature since 1990. If Dwight is going to run for political office, guess who he's running against? In most, but not all cases, a person of color.
And in all that time, he's run against one minority incumbent - Richard McIver, a very nice man who has a laid-back attitude to his position. (I believe his run against Dwight has perked him up, btw. He seems to be more involved than he was previously.) Dwight's a fighter, and he believed the city would be better served with him in that seat - which is exactly why a person SHOULD run for office. Like it or not, there were forceful arguments made from Democrats in the city that, and I quote, "There should be a minority on the Council". Like it or not, there are Democrats who voted for McIver based on the logic of "I like Dwight, but McIver's a minority".
Should minority status keep someone in office? Should it protect them from challenge? Should liberal white candidates step aside when a minority enters a race? How does a 'yes' answer to these questions reflect any sense of justice or fairness? How does this type of thinking advance issues of fairness and racial justice?
Here's the reality: Dwight hails from an extremely diverse neighborhood. He has represented people of color as an elected official since 1990. He's organized for liberal causes since the '70's. Had he sought out minorities to remove from elected office, this argument might have merit, but throughout his career, this has not been the case.
We must be honest with ourselves. We must be honest with each other. Are we part of the solution to these larger problems, or do we perpetuate them in our attempts - however well-meaning - to be sensitive? I think Seattle, Dwight Pelz, Greg Rodriguez, Phil Talmadge, possibly Senator Prentice, and the Democratic Party has been done a disservice by some of what has transpired over the past weeks, including Postman's article. We can do better than this. Let's get back to discussing organizing, outreach and fundraising. Let's move away from rumors and finger-pointing, and get our focus back. We should be too smart to allow the media to drive our discussions; we're informed, we have the means to talk to the candidates, and we know how the system works. Let's make the system work and move forward, together."-from the post by Switzerblog on Washblog.
"Dear Friends--
Over the weekend I read an article in the Seattle Times wherein State Senator Margarita Prentice implied that State Party Chair candidate Dwight Pelz might be "racist" because he has run against people of color in the past.
Now, we've all dealt with the press, and know how easy it is to have one's views misrepresented. I would like to think that has happened here and that Senator Prentice's statements have been turned into something they were originally not. I have spoken with Senator Prentice on the phone in the past, during the Dean campaign, and I know that she is a wise and thoughtful person.
However, because the article spun her position the way that it did, I've been thinking about what the implications are. Several things strike me:
First, Dwight Pelz lives in the 37th Legislative District, one of the most diverse districts in the state. When he was on the King County Council, he was required to run in the King County Council district that encompassed the 37th , as the KC Council, unlike the Seattle City Council, is a districted body. His choice of opponents was not at his discretion.
Second, when a choice of opponents was available to him during his race for the Seattle City Council, he ran against Richard McIver, an African American, not because of McIver's skin color, but because he felt McIver was vulnerable for having missed so many council meetings of importance. It should be noted that if the Seattle City Council were a districted body, Pelz's opponent would have been---Richard McIver.
Finally, I'd like to raise a more ephemeral but insidious concept. What is the true nature of racism when it presumes that all candidates are not equal, and that candidates of color have a right not to be challenged?
We are a majority white, middle-class body. We all hold the concept of diversity dear. This is a difficult issue to tackle, for it treads on old hurts that rightfully still sting.
But do we believe that Dwight Pelz, or any other candidate, must not oppose other candidates from his own neighborhoods and communities because they have different skin tones? I don't think we do, and I'd urge you to consider carefully what conclusions you draw from this article, and what opinions we might or might not spread as its result.
Thanks for reading!
~Lawrence"
Let's get something out in the open:
The leading candidates are not perfect people. Dwight Pelz can be direct, to a fault. Laura Ruderman can be abrasive. Phil Talmadge can be a dirty campaigner. And none of these things matter - the question is not whose company we prefer, but who will most effectively organize and fundraise and advance the message for our Party. And on those two questions, Dwight and Phil have rightfully risen to the forefront of the discussions.
I'm not sure what Senator Prentice's real issues with Dwight are - I hope Lawrence will let me know when he hears from her, and I hope he's right that Postman misrepresented her. But she's not the first to make this suggestion, and I take a less eloquent view of the issue than Lawrence: to me, it's just stupid. We might as well accuse Mark Wilson of being sexist because he keeps running against women.
I've watched Dwight interact with the public in small group settings, large rallies and parades, and one thing he is not is racially insensitive. The 37th has elected seven people of color to the state legislature since 1990. If Dwight is going to run for political office, guess who he's running against? In most, but not all cases, a person of color.
And in all that time, he's run against one minority incumbent - Richard McIver, a very nice man who has a laid-back attitude to his position. (I believe his run against Dwight has perked him up, btw. He seems to be more involved than he was previously.) Dwight's a fighter, and he believed the city would be better served with him in that seat - which is exactly why a person SHOULD run for office. Like it or not, there were forceful arguments made from Democrats in the city that, and I quote, "There should be a minority on the Council". Like it or not, there are Democrats who voted for McIver based on the logic of "I like Dwight, but McIver's a minority".
Should minority status keep someone in office? Should it protect them from challenge? Should liberal white candidates step aside when a minority enters a race? How does a 'yes' answer to these questions reflect any sense of justice or fairness? How does this type of thinking advance issues of fairness and racial justice?
Here's the reality: Dwight hails from an extremely diverse neighborhood. He has represented people of color as an elected official since 1990. He's organized for liberal causes since the '70's. Had he sought out minorities to remove from elected office, this argument might have merit, but throughout his career, this has not been the case.
We must be honest with ourselves. We must be honest with each other. Are we part of the solution to these larger problems, or do we perpetuate them in our attempts - however well-meaning - to be sensitive? I think Seattle, Dwight Pelz, Greg Rodriguez, Phil Talmadge, possibly Senator Prentice, and the Democratic Party has been done a disservice by some of what has transpired over the past weeks, including Postman's article. We can do better than this. Let's get back to discussing organizing, outreach and fundraising. Let's move away from rumors and finger-pointing, and get our focus back. We should be too smart to allow the media to drive our discussions; we're informed, we have the means to talk to the candidates, and we know how the system works. Let's make the system work and move forward, together."-from the post by Switzerblog on Washblog.
"A hit on students, elderly"
"So what did tuition-weary college students and their cash-strapped parents do to become major targets in Congress' last-minute attempt to appear to cut federal spending?
When it came time for Republicans in Washington to show where their hearts are, here's what happened: Vice President Dick Cheney zoomed home from Asia at warp speed aboard Air Force 2 to cast the tie-breaking 51st vote in the Senate for the budget bill, which, in addition to slashing college aid, also makes nasty cuts in spending on medical care for the elderly and the poor and drops new unfunded mandates on the states.
This was legislation conservatives in Congress had demanded so they could assure voters next year that they had done something to curb federal spending. At the same time, lawmakers are hoping the public doesn't realize that this cut is only a faint scratch in a budget larded with tax cuts, war spending, and carefree pork-barrel projects that will balloon - not reduce - the size of the deficit.
As it turned out, a full one-third of the $39.7 billion lopped off the federal budget in the lawmakers' pre-Christmas rush will be realized in reduced college aid and higher interest rates on student loans.
As painful as the cuts in educational assistance may be to middle-class students and parents, two-thirds of the cuts target the least fortunate among us - the elderly and poor who have medical problems.
For example, Medicaid recipients who now pay a $3 co-payment for a range of health-care services will find themselves charged $20 to $100. Medicare recipients - everyone over 65 - will see cuts in home health services, the aid that helps many elderly stay out of nursing homes.
Cash-strapped states like Ohio and Michigan will be required to institute strict new work requirements for welfare recipients, or face the loss of badly needed federal aid.
These are the priorities of Congress' Republican majority. They call it reform. We call it a gratuitous attack on people least likely to be able to protect themselves."-from the editorial today in the Toledo Blade (OH).
How did Dave Reichert vote on this?
When it came time for Republicans in Washington to show where their hearts are, here's what happened: Vice President Dick Cheney zoomed home from Asia at warp speed aboard Air Force 2 to cast the tie-breaking 51st vote in the Senate for the budget bill, which, in addition to slashing college aid, also makes nasty cuts in spending on medical care for the elderly and the poor and drops new unfunded mandates on the states.
This was legislation conservatives in Congress had demanded so they could assure voters next year that they had done something to curb federal spending. At the same time, lawmakers are hoping the public doesn't realize that this cut is only a faint scratch in a budget larded with tax cuts, war spending, and carefree pork-barrel projects that will balloon - not reduce - the size of the deficit.
As it turned out, a full one-third of the $39.7 billion lopped off the federal budget in the lawmakers' pre-Christmas rush will be realized in reduced college aid and higher interest rates on student loans.
As painful as the cuts in educational assistance may be to middle-class students and parents, two-thirds of the cuts target the least fortunate among us - the elderly and poor who have medical problems.
For example, Medicaid recipients who now pay a $3 co-payment for a range of health-care services will find themselves charged $20 to $100. Medicare recipients - everyone over 65 - will see cuts in home health services, the aid that helps many elderly stay out of nursing homes.
Cash-strapped states like Ohio and Michigan will be required to institute strict new work requirements for welfare recipients, or face the loss of badly needed federal aid.
These are the priorities of Congress' Republican majority. They call it reform. We call it a gratuitous attack on people least likely to be able to protect themselves."-from the editorial today in the Toledo Blade (OH).
How did Dave Reichert vote on this?
Sunday, January 01, 2006
"Bush Impeachment Inquiry Has 8 House Co-Sponsors"
"A total of eight US House members have co-sponsored Resolution 635 to create a select committee to investigate the grounds for impeaching President Bush, Atlanta Progressive News has learned.
The co-sponsors are Rep. Lois Capps (D-CA), Rep. John Conyers (D-MI), Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-TX), Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-CA), Rep. Donald Payne (D-NJ), Rep. Charles Rangel (D-NY), Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA), and Rep. Lynn Woolsey (C-CA), according to the US Congressional website Thomas.loc.gov.
HR 635 reads as its official title: "Creating a select committee to investigate the Administration's intent to go to war before congressional authorization, manipulation of pre-war intelligence, encouraging and countenancing torture, retaliating against critics, and to make recommendations regarding grounds for possible impeachment."
The bill was initially proposed by Rep. Conyers on 12/18/2005. The 7 other co-sponsors added their names on 12/22/05.
"In brief, we have found that there is substantial evidence the President, the Vice-President and other high ranking members of the Bush Administration misled Congress and the American people regarding the decision to go to war in Iraq; misstated and manipulated intelligence information regarding the justification for such war; countenanced torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment in Iraq; and permitted inappropriate retaliation against critics of their Administration. There is at least a prima facie case that these actions that federal laws have been violated – from false statements to Congress to retaliating against Administration critics," Rep. Conyers said in a press release on 12/20/05.
As reported last week in Atlanta Progressive News, US Rep. John Lewis (D-GA) stated in a radio program that he would sign a bill of impeachment of President Bush if it were drafted on account of Bush’s approval of illegal domestic wiretapping. US Senator Barbara Boxer has also requested a report by legal scholars regarding the grounds for the Bush’s impeachment for the same reason. The article regarding the statements by Rep. Lewis and Sen. Boxer is available here.
Meanwhile, a current pageview of an MSNBC.com poll as of 01/01/06, shows 86% of 185,673 total respondents believe President Bush should be impeached. The poll is available here and has been active online for several days."-from Matthew Cardinale's article in the Atlanta Progressive News via AfterDowningStreet.org.
The co-sponsors are Rep. Lois Capps (D-CA), Rep. John Conyers (D-MI), Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-TX), Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-CA), Rep. Donald Payne (D-NJ), Rep. Charles Rangel (D-NY), Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA), and Rep. Lynn Woolsey (C-CA), according to the US Congressional website Thomas.loc.gov.
HR 635 reads as its official title: "Creating a select committee to investigate the Administration's intent to go to war before congressional authorization, manipulation of pre-war intelligence, encouraging and countenancing torture, retaliating against critics, and to make recommendations regarding grounds for possible impeachment."
The bill was initially proposed by Rep. Conyers on 12/18/2005. The 7 other co-sponsors added their names on 12/22/05.
"In brief, we have found that there is substantial evidence the President, the Vice-President and other high ranking members of the Bush Administration misled Congress and the American people regarding the decision to go to war in Iraq; misstated and manipulated intelligence information regarding the justification for such war; countenanced torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment in Iraq; and permitted inappropriate retaliation against critics of their Administration. There is at least a prima facie case that these actions that federal laws have been violated – from false statements to Congress to retaliating against Administration critics," Rep. Conyers said in a press release on 12/20/05.
As reported last week in Atlanta Progressive News, US Rep. John Lewis (D-GA) stated in a radio program that he would sign a bill of impeachment of President Bush if it were drafted on account of Bush’s approval of illegal domestic wiretapping. US Senator Barbara Boxer has also requested a report by legal scholars regarding the grounds for the Bush’s impeachment for the same reason. The article regarding the statements by Rep. Lewis and Sen. Boxer is available here.
Meanwhile, a current pageview of an MSNBC.com poll as of 01/01/06, shows 86% of 185,673 total respondents believe President Bush should be impeached. The poll is available here and has been active online for several days."-from Matthew Cardinale's article in the Atlanta Progressive News via AfterDowningStreet.org.
"Open Letter From an Iraqi" (UPDATED)
"While there is deep concern about the possibility of civil war, the common talk between all groups now in Iraq is the poor infrastructure, poor electricity, deficiency of fuels, bad drinking water, poor health services, poor education and extensive unemployment.
Unemployment doesn't mean that young men don’t have jobs, because you can hardly find a young man who sits in his house. Instead, they will sell cigarettes, for example, or they work as taxi drivers or in the weapons trade, etc. This kind of way of living will not improve Iraq.
I want to ask Mr. Bush…do you think that Iran is a democratic country? With freedom and liberty? Do you?
If your answer is yes, then we can understand what is going in our country.
But if your answer is no, then let me ask you again…are you insane? (pardon me)
Because now you have let those people and their followers have the power and drag us 100’s of years backwards.
The very same who want to cut the body of Iraq into pieces so that they can rule their way, or should I say the Iranian way? It’s the same.
Well Mr. Bush, I shall tell you that your troops invaded Iraq in three weeks. But that was easy for you because many Iraqis, including myself believed you. Let’s say that we had a dream. We believed that you are going to take us to the real freedom.
And as I am writing a vision flashed in my mind, drawing back these nice, hopeful dreams. I miss that dream I had from when I saw first an American soldier with my eyes, and knew that Saddam’s era; war era, sanctions era and suffering era had gone.
In this moment, now I wish that your era had not come. Because of you, we have witnessed horrible days and the future is a gloomy one.
Mr Bush, be acknowledged that the Iraqi police and Iraqi army are not dealing or treating Iraqi citizens as citizens should be dealt with. They humiliate them, insult them with bad words and aim their guns toward people without a reason. They have limited everything in our lives; they have limited our roads, they have limited our freedom to go on the streets after 8 pm, they have limited our feeling of security, they have limited our hopes, our dreams and our social life.
Do you know that the government you installed has increased fuel prices five fold? It has failed to provide the minimum power to people and failed to supply water (Even if not good to drink. In addition, water is not available for the last days in Baghdad, the capital city of Iraq).
Mr. Bush, you must be proud of your new icon of democracy in the heart of the Middle East. Let me assure you that today there is no one in the world who wants to be in your icon of democracy, and not one country would want to be like Iraq. You know why? Because you have turned our lives into a seemingly endless series of crises and our suffering is day and night.
Finally, nothing seems positive now after the fraudulent ballots of the last elections. After all, the biggest winner is Iran and the Kurds. So you might go and sleep well tonight.
Signature:
An Iraqi citizen who believes in freedom and democracy, and who is craving them."-from the post yesterday on Dahr Jamail's Iraqui Dispatches.
Update: Juan Cole, Professor of History at the University of Michigan, has "Ten Amazing Predictions for 2006," on his blog, Informed Comment.
Unemployment doesn't mean that young men don’t have jobs, because you can hardly find a young man who sits in his house. Instead, they will sell cigarettes, for example, or they work as taxi drivers or in the weapons trade, etc. This kind of way of living will not improve Iraq.
I want to ask Mr. Bush…do you think that Iran is a democratic country? With freedom and liberty? Do you?
If your answer is yes, then we can understand what is going in our country.
But if your answer is no, then let me ask you again…are you insane? (pardon me)
Because now you have let those people and their followers have the power and drag us 100’s of years backwards.
The very same who want to cut the body of Iraq into pieces so that they can rule their way, or should I say the Iranian way? It’s the same.
Well Mr. Bush, I shall tell you that your troops invaded Iraq in three weeks. But that was easy for you because many Iraqis, including myself believed you. Let’s say that we had a dream. We believed that you are going to take us to the real freedom.
And as I am writing a vision flashed in my mind, drawing back these nice, hopeful dreams. I miss that dream I had from when I saw first an American soldier with my eyes, and knew that Saddam’s era; war era, sanctions era and suffering era had gone.
In this moment, now I wish that your era had not come. Because of you, we have witnessed horrible days and the future is a gloomy one.
Mr Bush, be acknowledged that the Iraqi police and Iraqi army are not dealing or treating Iraqi citizens as citizens should be dealt with. They humiliate them, insult them with bad words and aim their guns toward people without a reason. They have limited everything in our lives; they have limited our roads, they have limited our freedom to go on the streets after 8 pm, they have limited our feeling of security, they have limited our hopes, our dreams and our social life.
Do you know that the government you installed has increased fuel prices five fold? It has failed to provide the minimum power to people and failed to supply water (Even if not good to drink. In addition, water is not available for the last days in Baghdad, the capital city of Iraq).
Mr. Bush, you must be proud of your new icon of democracy in the heart of the Middle East. Let me assure you that today there is no one in the world who wants to be in your icon of democracy, and not one country would want to be like Iraq. You know why? Because you have turned our lives into a seemingly endless series of crises and our suffering is day and night.
Finally, nothing seems positive now after the fraudulent ballots of the last elections. After all, the biggest winner is Iran and the Kurds. So you might go and sleep well tonight.
Signature:
An Iraqi citizen who believes in freedom and democracy, and who is craving them."-from the post yesterday on Dahr Jamail's Iraqui Dispatches.
Update: Juan Cole, Professor of History at the University of Michigan, has "Ten Amazing Predictions for 2006," on his blog, Informed Comment.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)