Danger Democrat alerts us to a very blunt City Council campaign in Plattsburgh.

Yup, we need more of that. And not just on yard signs.

Tracked down an old photo from election night 2005 when I was campaigning with my son for Norman Siegel.

In 2005 Norman Siegel started late, only got fundraising going last minute, and was up against and incumbent.

Norman is running again in 2009. And he is starting early and already is fundraising (sent in my donation already!). Guaranteed you will see an update to this photo as Jacob and I campaign again for Norm. You can read my opinion of Norm Siegel for Public Advocate in 2005 here.

If you are interested in electing the former head of the New York Civil Liberties Union as NYC's Public Advocate, contact New Yorkers for Norman Siegel:
212-488-6271

One of the most disgusting tactics the Republicans have used is exploiting the 9/11 attacks for their own gains. As my wife (when she was 8 months pregnant) yelled at Republican delegates to the Republican Convention in 2004, "Shame on you for turning our tragedy into a photo op." The delegates were none too pleased being chased down the street by a very pregnant woman accusing them of exploiting our tragedy.

Well, as I reported yesterday, Rudy Giuliani (the man despised by the firefighters who were the TRUE heroes of 9/11) is the latest Republican to use this disgusting tactic. Not only was Giuliani's claim that only a Republican can prevent a terrorist attack a disgusting exploitation of a national tragedy, but it is demonstrably wrong. Clinton's administration prevented the millenium attacks. He also warned the nation that al-Qaeda was going to attack. Bush's administration ignored the warnings and the 9/11 attacks happened on HIS watch. Giuliani is wrong.

Howard Dean is taking him on and I think it is particularly important for NYC to reject "anti-firefighter" Giuliani's exploitation of the attacks on our city. This is Howard Dean's message and call to action:

A few months aback, when I first wrote about the vacancy in the 40th city council district, I had never in my wildest imaginations expected so much drama to a simple special election; but drama we had, and maybe the best is yet to come. No sense rehashing all the funky stuff of the past few months, but let me bring some of you up to date as to where we are, with just three days to the election (part two).

About 48 hours ago, a federal judge put candidate Wellington Sharpe back on the ballot, after he was removed by the NYC Board of Elections, who had upheld a challenge on Sharpe’s petitions from the Mathieu Eugene camp. Then yesterday, an appellate court held that despite the fact that Eugene had created the present vacancy in this district- by failing to take up his duly elected post- he should be still placed on the ballot, since his deceptive behavior didn’t reach the level of a felony. They arrived at this position despite the fact that the law is clear: once you create a vacancy, you cannot run for said office. The law is also clear that failing to swear in to office meant that “you” created the vacancy. So on Tuesday (4-24-07), there will be a special election in Brooklyn again, with Mathieu Eugene, Wellington Sharpe and Harry Schiffman as the candidates. So much for the law, its variations and violations; and on we go, and on we go, and we go on.

When I did an article a few months ago about the possibility of a black borough president in Brooklyn’s near future, it was because I had observed a trend in Brooklyn’s politics over the past five years, whereby blacks and Hispanics were winning borough-wide races for civil and supreme courts, on a regular basis. It started in 2002, when both Delores Thomas and Margarita Lopez-Torres won county-wide races in the same year; something unfathomable to many an old-timer in Brooklyn. Then Chandrya Simpson did it the following year, and it was repeated subsequently in 2004, 2005 and 2006, with blacks and Hispanics making it look mundane, if not simple.

In two years time, Marty Markowitz, the current Brooklyn Borough President will be term-limited out of office; this throws up a vacancy, and it also offers a historic opportunity for a female, or a black, or a Hispanic-or a person other than someone male and Caucasian-to ascend to this office. So, in this the year of Barack Obama (2007), no black candidate has officially declared for the race as yet, but some have made very public statements of their intentions. This group includes the cerebral Chris Owens, Jamaican-born Assemblyman Nick Perry and the controversial NYC councilman Charles Barron. It has also been brought to my attention that over the years State Senator Velmanette Montgomery has openly admitted an interest in this race. Some folks are saying that she is definitely running this time around. Other blacks whose names have been bandied around for this race from time to time, include State Senator John Sampson, Assemblywoman Annette Robinson, NYC council-woman Tish James and Assemblyman Darryl Towns, however, for various reasons, all four seem not inclined to pursue this particular race at present- albeit that could change over the next year or so.

March is an insane month for the amount of political events you can go to. The proof is in the amount of political heavy hitters DL21C was able to wrangle during that month : Jon Kerry, Wesley Clark, John Tester, John Edwards, Bill Richardson. It is also an insane month for the amount of technology and media conferences you can get invited to, the most important (at least for me) being SXSW --but there's eTech and IDPI as well.

I missed almost all the events involving presidential candidates because of the amount of conferences I was involved in during the month of March. Once I was done with my last one, ARC's national conference on "Facing Race", I was free to enjoy a candidate or two by the end of the month. I wasn't able to make it to the John Edwards event (I was having some fun at a party with Nancy Pelosi).

So 3/26 was Bill Richardson's lucky number.

I already posted the footage of Bill Richardson and Barack Obama's responses. Here is the one I had missed so far.

Here is the second Democracy for America film clip on the Democratic Primary candidates. As with Barack Obama's clip, I present it without comment:

Currently I am still in the data collection period of deciding on who I support in 2008. To date I have mainly focused on Obama and Edwards, both of whom look good in Iowa polls and have considerable smarts and charm. Hillary looks good in the same polls and has smarts, but as one of her constituents, I can tell you she doesn't have much charm. I am unlikely to support Hillary in the primaries. Richardson is the latest one to come to my attention. I will write more about this in the future, but simply put, Richardson has the best resume. Absolutely excellent experience right down to nominations for Nobel Peace Prize. And, let's face it, Governors not Senators win the general election. He is trailing in the polls and, from what I hear, he lacks charm. But he is the one who could come up from behind.

So, for those who want to see more of our candidates, I try to highlight events that give you such opportunities. I think one of the best ways to see what a candidate has is the Daily Show with Jon Stewart. Sadly I seldom get the chance to see Jon Stewart because my wife and I generally don't stay up that late. But it is always worth ratching.

For months now it seemed to me that Wes Clark was running for President without yet RUNNING for President. As I get an increasing number of emails from Wes supporters describing an increasing number of events surrounding this not-yet candidate, it has been inevitable for me to start assuming Wes will declare in time. What is he waiting for? Not sure. But clearly he is waiting for just the right moment. My money is on his declaring and has been for months. And this is one reason why I have taken all predictions about 2008, including the Hillary inevitability myth, as highly suspect.

Now, I am very unlikely to support Wes Clark in the primary. And I am very unlikely to support Hillary Clinton in the primary. I lean vaguely towards Edwards or Obama. But I will make clear that I almost certainly would campaign for either Clark or Clinton in the general election should they get the nomination. Though I might lean towards Edwards or Obama, I consider the other contenders perfectly good candidates for President and would eagerly support them over the Veteran who has betrayed Veterans (McCain) and the 9/11 "hero" who has betrayed the REAL 9/11 heroes (Giuliani) or any of the other political dwarfs the Republicans are running.