2006 Elections

Thomas Suozzi for 2006?- I had the chance to see in action Suozzo at the last Drum Major Institute's Marketplace of Ideas panel on environmental justice. I have to saw in him and I really liked his straight shooting talk. It's not only that he's fighting "the man" in environmental issues, it's that Suozzi's renegade stance toward the New York State Democratic Party's "king making" machine just calls the rebel in me : [via Fix Albany - About Tom Suozzi]:
Mr. Suozzi made history in 2001 when he overcame conventional wisdom and defeated his Republican opponent by a margin of nearly two to one in a County with more registered Republicans than any county in New York State. He is the first Democratic County Executive in over thirty years, and only the second in Nassau's history. He is also the first Democratic County Executive with a Democratic Legislature since 1917. Prior to his astonishing win which the Washington Post characterized as a "landslide victory" in the general election, Mr. Suozzi --regarded by many as the underdog-- upset his opponent to gain the Democratic nomination for County Executive.
Yeah, I know, Steve Gilliard sent him a blogger's bitch-slapping just last month. THE NEWS BLOG | Look hard before you leap
Protect Social Security: Pressure Vito Fossella- Press Conference: The Real Faces of Social Security WHEN: Sunday, July 24th, 1:00 p.m. WHERE: Staten Island Borough Hall Come pressure Vito Fossella, a potential swing vote on Social Security, to support, not destroy, Social Security. The "In This Together" campaign is having some success making key Republicans, including Fossella, very uncomfortable about Bush's Social Security plans. Keep up the pressure! We are winning this fight and we can't let up now.
OH-2 was fun...now let's REALLY crank it up!- I was talking with folks at a DFNYC meetup last night about the OH-2 special election. People were really impressed with what was almost accomplished. Grassroots fundraising over a couple of weeks brought in nearly $500,000 in small contributions (around $50 average donation). A Dem candidate came within a hair of winning a district that is so solidly Repub that no Dem in 15 years has pulled more than 30%. Paul Hackett pulled 48%. The internet grassroots turned a sure-thing for the Repubs into a close race. This is our model for how to win 2006. We all knew we would probably lose OH-2, but for a moment there it sure was great to see the grassroots momentum roaring forward and scaring the pants off the Republican party. We all just for a moment could imagine that Paul Hackett would beat the corrupt, chickenhawk, unAmerican Republican party. But it was not to be. Not yet. Not YET. But we sure scared them, didn't we? Want to scare them some more? We really can get them on the run if we try. Come join me in our own, grassroots attack on the corrupt Haliburton Republicans. Keep reading and see how we can take OH-2 to every corner of the nation starting now. We can't sustain that high a level of activity, unfortunately, but we can sustain a good level of activism and donations. There are important 2005 races that need out help right now and let me tell you that 2006 is right around the corner. I know someone running for Congress and he's been at it for more than a year already and bemoaning the slowness of the grassroots when it comes to the 2006 races. So let's use the momentum of OH-2 and let's barnstorm this nation from sea to shining sea.
Losing Home, Losing Brooklyn, and Chris Owens, the Politician who Gets It- I always try to discuss local candidates that I meet, particularly those who are particularly good. In the past I discussed mayoral candidates (trying my best to counter the â€œBloomberg is okay
Congressman Meeks on the Defensive- On July 27, the US House of Representatives narrowly passed CAFTA by a vote of 217 to 215, thanks to 15 Democrats who went to the other side and voted with the Bush regime for multinational corporate interests. My representative, Gregory Meeks was one of the "CAFTA 15".

Like any good citizen, I called his office before the vote to express my opposition to the bill. Now that the bill has passed, I have a new card to play. I have recently been hired to write a new bi-weekly column for the Times Ledger newspaper group in Queens (Queens' largest community newspaper, with over 50,000 paid subscribers). My first article should appear either this Thursday or next and will focus on the fallout from Meeks' vote.

On Sunday, I attended a press conference organized by the Working Families party, and attended by representatives of labor unions in the AFL-CIO and Change to Win. After the press conference, when I was done asking a few follow-up questions to Brian McLaughlin, I was approached by Rep. Meeks' Communications Director, who was apparently hanging out in the back of the press conference to make sure that reporters came away with Rep. Meeks' position. I've received his earlier statements, but I accepted her new materials and incorporated part of Meeks' justification in my column (the particularly lame complaint "Despite the fact that CAFTA is by no means a perfect agreement, voting it down was not a valid option because it would not subsequently be replaced by a perfect agreement"). She wanted to get me more material, but my deadline was essentially later that night.
Taking OH-2 National: Part II---Defense! Defense! Defense!- A couple of weeks ago I outlined a strategy of taking the enthusiasm of the OH-2 race and turn it National. I noticed that some of the links I suggested that hadn't gotten too much activity suddenly got a small surge. So I THINK people responded to my call to action. Or maybe just a coincidence...? Either way, I want to parse my call to action, focusing on the actions bit by bit. I started doing this with a call to local activism last week. In some ways I could stop there because last week's diary summarizes the most important stuff. But there really is more we can and should do. I honestly think that our activism now...today...will be what determines the 2006 and 2008 elections. This week I want to focus on our defense of fellow Democrats. Why am I starting with defense? Simple. A strong strategy for winning is to first make sure your defenses are strong enough in case your more aggressive attacks fail. We need to make sure that in 2005 and 2006 we don't LOSE ground. I will start with the 2005 NJ Governor's race. I choose to start here for a very personal reason. Karl Rove and Dick Cheney came to New Jersey, using 9/11, the attack on my city, to try and raise funds for the Republican candidate in the NJ Gov race. I am offended that they used my city's tragedy to further their political goals. So I am doing all I can to support Corzine, the Dem candidate for NJ Gov. This is a personal vendetta I have against Rove and Cheney for desecrating the memories of NYC's 9/11 dead. We need to make sure that the Repubs do not take the NJ Gov race. We have to defend this seat for the Dems. PLEASE visit the Corzine webiste and consider donating (or volunteering if you live in or near NJ).
The Column That Never Was- The column that I was hired to write for a certain Queens weekly has been canceled before the first piece was even published. That piece, a critical look at the fall-out from Congressman Greg Meeks' support for CAFTA, did not appear in this past Thursday's issue, although an editorial lavishing praise on the Congressman for his championing of banks over people, was featured rather prominently.

I called to find out what happened, and was told the next day that Rep. Meeks had called the newspaper to complain about the previous post that appeared on this blarg. That's all, she wrote.

The managing editor - who hired me - explained over and over that "integrity" is really important to the paper, and that I had really crossed a line by posting the Congressman's voicemail message to me, without explaining that I had called him first. Of course, I explained that I hadn't called him, and that that's what made his personal phone call to me so noteworthy, and odd. She explained that she hadn't actually read the piece so much as glanced at it over the shoulder of the publisher, who was livid about the whole affair. (The publisher, it should be noted, was hectoring me about how labor's position on CAFTA was "illiberal" within seconds of my being hired and explaining my first column.) She also hadn't read the actual submitted column itself.
Dumb, Dumber, Dumbest- According to Monday's New York Daily News: "Senate candidate Jeanine Pirro is set to unleash a one-two endorsement punch from former Mayor Rudy Giuliani and Gov. Pataki, sources close to her campaign told the Daily News yesterday." Given their bios, does getting a nod from these two freaks actual constitute a positive event for Pirro? ^^After terrorizing black people for eight years, Rudy Guiliani went on to shill full time for the Republicans, whoring out 9/11 in the name of of the presidential campaign, whose highpoint for Rudy was blaming the troops for Bush's failed war. ^^It's hard for people to believe that George Pataki has reached term limit given that he has accomplished SO LITTLE during his time as NY governor. In total craptastic fashion, he sold out New Yorkers who voted for him based on his moderate positions by vetoing easy access to morning-after pills. Way to go Hacky! ^^Mainly famous for her husband, who is a typically crap-ass baby daddy. Cast from the same mold as Bush, she also has difficulty speaking publically unless it's all spelled out for her in BIG BLOCK LETTERS.
Federal government clueless about how to respond to disaster- Today's press conference at the White House was chilling for everyone who lives in a terror target - like us 8,000,000 New Yorkers.
Q I'm asking a direct question. Is he confident -- MR. McCLELLAN: We're going to remain focused on the people. Q -- that he can secure the American people in the event of a major terrorist attack? MR. McCLELLAN: We are securing the American people by staying on the offensive abroad and working to spread freedom and democracy in the Middle East. Q That's a talking point. That's a talking point. MR. McCLELLAN: No, that's a fact. Go ahead. Q No, it's not. And you think people who are watching this think that's -- from what does he derive that confidence, based on the response -- MR. McCLELLAN: David, I'm interested in the people in the region that have been affected and getting them help. We can sit here and engage in this back and forth -- Q The whole country is watching and wondering about some -- MR. McCLELLAN: The time for bickering and blame-gaming is later. The time for helping people in the region is now.
In other words, other than robotically reciting their prepared talking points, and with a catastrophic failure just behind them, the 'pugs are clueless. We have exactly 15 months to prepare for the Congressional elections and sweep these people out of power. Until then, be afraid, be very afraid.
If you don't vote in primaries you might as well not vote. Oct 14 is the last day to do a party change in time for '06- Its true. I've made enemies saying it. But its true. If you aren't a registered Dem in NYC and you live in most parts of the city-- well you might as well not vote (except for mayor). Whoever wins the Democratic Primary wins the election. Everyone knows this. So why are so many members of my generation not registered Democrats? Probably for the same reason I wasn't-- they are disgusted by the corruption, stagnation, wimpy-ness and conservativism of so many Dem electeds. In the DIY Punk world we had a saying: "Don't hate the media- BECOME the media" (Jello Biafra of the Dead Kennedy's said this first). Well I say, don't hate the Dems, BECOME the Dems. Only with hundreds and hundreds of progressives, reformers, innovators and grassroots people registering Democrat will we be able to stop the Clarence Normans and Joe Liebermans of the world (my complaint about the later is different than my complaint about the former). We've got one political boss down in Brooklyn but there are more to go. Maybe that sounds idealistic. But don't forget, after Goldwater went down some hardcore conservatives decided to take THEIR party back from the libertarian-ish wing. And they did. And now they run everything (into the ground). So swallow your pride, ideology and dogma. Register to vote as a Democrat- and VOTE THE BUMS OUT! The deadline is Oct 14th.
Withered pachyderms and other amusements- Perhaps this is the right time to make some observations on the subject of right-wingers here in Gotham. Full disclosure: I read their blogs and sundry web sites regularly, with the goal of both amusement and information. The amusement value of right-wingers in this town is clear: they toil under the tremendous burden placed on them by delusions of adequacy and relevance. Itâ€™s difficult to take seriously a party that is relegated to fringe status, especially when its adherents entertain ideas of future victories in the midst of one thrashing after another. The future of right-wingers, and Râ€™s generally in this town, isnâ€™t the Bloomberg trajectory; look to Ognibene if you require a crystal ball. The information value of right-wing sites may not be readily apparent, since, as noted, they originate with an entirely spent force. However, it seems fair to point out that the final allocation of resources in the 2005 election by our organization, New Democratic Majority, was prompted in part by surveillance of right-wing sites gloating about picking up City Council seats. We put out calls to action for the Garodnick, Lappin and Gentile races, and as is known, our candidates crushed their well-funded opponents. Thatâ€™s the difference between a chatter site and actual political clout, dearest elephants. We prefer, and I know The Daily Gotham prefers, having the latter. Going into the 2006 cycle, weâ€™re not all that concerned about whatever R candidates emerge from the various primaries; there arenâ€™t significant numbers of buyers for whatever wares theyâ€™ll be peddling in the marketplace of ideas. Rather, weâ€™re focusing on the last leaking dam of right-wing power in this blue state: the State Senate and the Congressional delegation, which are filled with geriatric legacies. Make no mistake â€“ we are playing to win, and weâ€™re playing against a team that knows its own weakness. Mr. Sala and his pachyderms are free to go on whistling past the proverbial graveyard; we have shovels and headstones at the ready for a number of walking political dead. Perhaps weâ€™ll see each other at the wake.
Darwin and Hobbes in Albany- Republicans generally have a problem with the theory of evolution. They could put their minds to rest by looking at the behavior of their Albany chapter, where the naked struggle for survival illustrates not just the validity of Darwin, but even of Hobbesâ€™ war of all against all. Case in point: In the face of the crushing poll margins of Spitzer and Hillary respectively, they have quietly thrown Jeannine Pirro to the wolves â€“ witness her fundraising numbers. Meanwhile, Joe Bruno has recruited the one person for the gubernatorial race whom George Pataki can be presumed to loathe more than any Democrat: Tom Golisano. In terms of sheer desperation, this is roughly comparable to the idea of Harry Reid trying to recruit Ralph Nader to the 2008 Democratic ticket. Golisano has run against Pataki, the ostensible state party leader, three times, spending $75 million for his last race in 2002. His withering attacks on Pataki did result in a 14% share of the vote, however; putting him on the ticket would at least affirm the partyâ€™s faith-based belief in the possibility of miracles. On the other side of the struggle is state chairman Minarik, pushing another unlikely candidate, former Massachusetts governor Bill Weld. This candidacy may have run into some problems with the ongoing investigation of a college which Weld headed until a short time ago, as reported by
From "The Hill": The price of a Rubber Stamp Congress- By Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-Ill.) Until this point, Republicans have been proud to call themselves President Bushâ€™s partner. But the special-interest agenda Republicans have been pushing is costing Americans at home and abroad more than ever. For the past five years the Republican Rubber Stamp Congress has cost American families and will cost Republicans at the ballot box next year. Independent, nonpartisan congressional voting analysis shows that President Bush has seen a level of loyalty from his party in Congress that has not been seen by past presidents. Last year, congressional Republicans voted with the president more than 80 percent of the time. Unfortunately for the American people, those votes have been on an agenda that puts the special interests first and the interests of American families last. The priorities of the White House and the Republican Congress are at times completely divergent from the things that matter to American families. Across the country, American families are suffering. They are paying more at the pump, more at the pharmacy counter and more in home-heating costs, yet all we see coming out of the Congress are more special-interest giveaways to the very interests that control those everyday essentials. Just this month, Republicans left $14 billion dollars in subsidies for big oil in the budget at the same time they cut student aid by $14 billion â€” the largest cut in history. In response, the public has lost confidence in the White House and, to an even greater degree, in Congress. Two out of three Americans view Congress unfavorably. Further, in April 2002, only 12 percent of Americans said they would be more likely to support someone who opposed President Bush on major issues. This November, 55 percent of Americans now say they prefer candidates who do not support the president. There is clear evidence that the American people are wholly rejecting this Republican Rubber Stamp Congress. Perhaps there is no better example of this rubber-stamp behavior than the federal budget where the Republican Congress chose: â€¢ Corporate tax cuts for Wall Street over tax relief for main-street American families â€” they claimed to be fixing a $4 billion problem with a $150 billion giveaway to the special interests. â€¢ More than $14 billion in giveaways to big energy, and then they cut more than $14 billion in student aid. â€¢ A sham prescription-drug plan and dressed it up as a prescription-drug â€œbenefit.
A few examples of how in New York we legislate against EQUALITY, AUTONOMY AND FREEDOM- Thanks to NARAL-Pro Choice for keeping track of this information at prochoiceamerica.org : New York Legislation. I have made myself a promise : EQUALITY, AUTONOMY AND FREEDOM are going to be my issues to jour in the coming elections. I believe many legislative and political decisions made in this country in the last 20 years have been towards curtailing these three precepts of our culture. We've lost ground on equal rights under the law, not just on reproductive issues, but in the broader idea of social justice. So you have environmental, educational or even national & state security policies that disregard the precepts of equal protection under the law. We have lost ground also on law regarding autonomy : Reproductive autonomy and hence the individual autonomy of women --especially teenagers. Personal autonomy is, of course, springs from the more general idea of freedom. Autonomy though, when it involves a child and their learning path --a path that may take them against schooling--; is not only negated but attacked in many education regulations and laws in this state; making it one of the least progressive states in the country when it comes to education legislation. As to freedom; there is nothing more patently against freedom than the Patriot Act. Less 'in your face' but more of a nightmare are the digital restrictions management laws which have been successfully been used not only to curtail the free movement of ideas in this country but even of people (aka, workers carrying 'intellectual property' owned by their employers). In the following list of bills you can see a pattern of mandated co-ersion. Women under the law have become nothing more than incubators in a political game of human harvesting.
ABORTION BANS AFTER 12 WEEKS Bill Number: NY A 6433 Summary: Bans safe, medically appropriate abortions as early as 12 weeks of pregnancy without exception to protect women's health. Sponsor: Manning (R) Introduced: 03/11/2005 Last Action: Introduced Bill Number: NY S 1868 Summary: Bans safe, medically appropriate abortions as early as 12 weeks of pregnancy without exception to protect women's health. Sponsor: Maltese (R) Introduced: 02/04/2005 Last Action: Introduced ABSTINENCE-ONLY Bill Number: NY A 554 Summary: Appropriates funds for abstinence education. Sponsor: Office of the Governor Introduced: 01/18/2005 Last Action: Enacted with Governor's Signature Last Action Date: 04/12/2005 ANTI-CHOICE CLINICS Bill Number: NY A 555 Summary: Relates to providing funds for anti-choice clinics that are barred from providing women with access to the full range of reproductive health options. Sponsor: Office of the Governor Introduced: 01/18/2005 Last Action: Enacted with Governor's Signature Last Action Date: 04/12/2005 BIASED COUNSELING AND MANDATORY DELAY Bill Number: NY A 4753 Summary: Mandates parental consent prior to a young woman obtaining an abortion without an exception to protect young women's health. Requires women receive state-mandated lecture prior to obtaining abortion services; prohibits abortion unless women wait an additional 24 hours after receiving lecture. Sponsor: Barra (R) Introduced: 02/14/2005 Last Action: Introduced Bill Number: NY A 5696 Summary: Requires women receive state-mandated lecture prior to obtaining abortion services; prohibits abortion unless women wait an additional 24 hours after receiving lecture. Sponsor: Young (R) Introduced: 02/25/2005 Last Action: Introduced Bill Number: NY S 1869 Summary: Requires women receive state-mandated lecture which may include medically inaccurate information prior to obtaining abortion services; prohibits abortion unless women wait an additional 24 hours after receiving lecture. Sponsor: Maltese (R) Introduced: 02/04/2005 Last Action: Introduced REFUSAL TO PROVIDE MEDICAL SERVICES Bill Number: NY S 1873 Summary: Allows certain individuals or entities to refuse to perform abortion services and to refuse to dispense or provide contraceptives in all or most circumstances. Sponsor: Maltese (R) Introduced: 02/04/2005 Last Action: Introduced RESTRICTIONS ON LOW-INCOME WOMEN'S ACCESS TO ABORTION Bill Number: NY A 4910 Summary: Restricts low-income women's access to abortion except in cases of life endangerment. Sponsor: Barraga (R) Introduced: 02/15/2005 Last Action: Introduced Bill Number: NY A 6119 Summary: Restricts low-income women's access to abortion. Sponsor: Kirwan (R) Introduced: 03/04/2005 Last Action: Introduced Bill Number: NY S 5623 Summary: Restricts low-income women's access to abortion except in cases of life endangerment, rape, or incest. Sponsor: Rules Cmt Introduced: 06/08/2005 Last Action: Passed Senate Last Action Date: 06/15/2005 RESTRICTIONS ON YOUNG WOMEN'S ACCESS TO ABORTION Bill Number: NY A 4753 Summary: Mandates parental consent prior to a young woman obtaining an abortion without an exception to protect young women's health. Requires women receive state-mandated lecture prior to obtaining abortion services; prohibits abortion unless women wait an additional 24 hours after receiving lecture. Sponsor: Barra (R) Introduced: 02/14/2005 Last Action: Introduced Bill Number: NY A 6439 Summary: Mandates parental notice prior to a young woman obtaining an abortion without adequate health exception. Sponsor: Reilich (R) Introduced: 03/11/2005 Last Action: Introduced Bill Number: NY S 2139 Summary: Mandates parental consent prior to a young woman obtaining an abortion without an exception to protect young women's health. Requires women receive state-mandated lecture prior to obtaining abortion services; prohibits abortion unless women wait an additional 24 hours after receiving lecture. Sponsor: Padavan (R) Introduced: 02/09/2005 Last Action: Introduced RESTRICTIONS ON YOUNG WOMEN'S ACCESS TO FAMILY PLANNING Bill Number: NY A 8075 Summary: Pharmacy access to emergency contraception (EC). Allows pharmacists to dispense EC directly to women without a prescription. Restricts young people's access to contraception by requiring parental notice. Sponsor: Manning (R) Introduced: 05/03/2005 Last Action: Introduced SEPARATE LEGAL STATUS FOR EMBRYOS AND FETUSES Bill Number: NY A 4544 Summary: Amends definition of "person" in portions of criminal code to include "an unborn child at any stage of gestation." Sponsor: Seddio (D) Introduced: 02/10/2005 Last Action: Introduced Bill Number: NY S 1867 Summary: Amends definition of "decedent" in section of civil law to include fetus. Sponsor: Maltese (R) Introduced: 02/04/2005 Last Action: Introduced Bill Number: NY S 2515 Summary: Amends definition of person in portions of criminal code to include "unborn child at any stage of gestation." Amends homicide laws to allow an "unborn child" to be a victim of crime separate and apart from the pregnant woman at any stage of pregnancy. Sponsor: Maltese (R) Introduced: 02/18/2005 Last Action: Introduced
I will be coming back to these legislations because I am particularly interested in knowing more about the sponsors, whether they are running on 2006, and if so, what are their fundraising machines. As you can see they are all republicans.
The state senate is the key to Progressive success in New York- Also from NDM: The 2006 elections will be another decisive step in ridding our country and our state of the scourge of republicanism. From now until Election Day, we'll be sending our activists targeted information to put the various races in context. This week, we'll focus on the basic dynamics of electoral power in New York State. The government of the state of New York can charitably be described as ossified and undemocratic. Legislative power is wielded by three men - the governor and the majority leaders of the Assembly and Senate, respectively. Two of these three men are republicans, which is an untenable situation in a state where we outnumber the other side by 3:2. NDM is not too concerned about the governor's race next year; Pataki fatigue is widespread and infectious to other GOP candidates, the voters are ready for change in Albany, and Democrats are in a fighting mood. Regardless of who the nominee of the other party is, or for that matter who our own nominee is, we're very confident about this race. There's also no reason to be concerned about Democratic prospects in holding a solid majority in the Assembly or winning the AG race. That makes the state Senate with its brittle republican majority a very inviting target for Progressive activists. Presently, the Senate is where Progressive legislation goes to die; the 34-27 republican majority is, in fact, the largest legislative hurdle facing the new Democratic governor we expect to elect in 2006. If we want to have an effective progressive government, we need to conquer this last bastion of GOP influence. The good news is that the Senate is, despite some very creatively drawn districts, ripe for a takeover. New York has been getting steadily more Democratic for a long time, as evidenced by the fact that we toppled three Senators last year and came within 18 votes of taking out a fourth. The 2005 election results, with Democratic sweeps across the state, provide further evidence of this trend. Beyond demographics, there are other considerations. Simply put, the incumbent Senators have usually been in office too long; they are relics of an earlier era, and it shows. Tellingly, Senate majority leader Bruno is not allowing any members of his caucus to retire. The essential weakness of their Senate majority is also the driving force behind the current Bruno-Pataki rift over the gubernatorial candidate. It will be important for Democrats to win the governorship next year, no doubt. But to have a truly effective Progressive governor, we also need to have a Democratic state Senate. The Senate will be either a roadblock or a superhighway for Progressive change.
Calling on Congress to Oppose the War in Iraq.- Opponents of the war in Iraq will petition members of Congress on December 14, 2005 as part of a national effort by Mov-on.org political action committee. I have volunteered to coordinate the visit to one congressional office: that of Eliot Engel in the Bronx. Engel has been fairly silent on the war in Iraq other than to complain that he was misled into voting in favor of the resolution which in effect authotized the Bush-war. This is the summary of the event from the move-on.org pac web site. Petition Eliot Engel to Oppose the War Blue Bay Rest. on Johnson Ave & 236 14 Dec 03:30 PM We will meet first at the Blue Bay, a well known diner in Riverdale. Then walk to Representative Engel's Bronx office We will try to meet with Congressman Engel or his staff. I will have called ahead to set to the meeting. I have called and written him a moderate amount and have been told he can be moved to oppose the war. Engel's office is not handicapped accessible, as I recall there are a few steps up to it. I do not know if the Blue Bay or Engel's office keeps pets. Engel's Bronx Office: 3655 Johnson Avenue Bronx, NY 10463 Phone : (718) 796-9700 Office hours : Monday-Friday 9 am - 5 pm. If you want to attend and/or help, visit the web-page and sign up. Perhaps Engel will join Murtha and Pelosi and spur the debate on ending this evil war. http://political.moveon.org/event/events/event.html?event_id=7262
I'm not a betting woman but ...-
[via NY1: Top Stories]:
A top aide for Jeanine Pirro says rumors that she is dropping out of the Senate race are false. Pirro spokeswoman Andrea Tantaros says the Westchester County district attorney still intends to challenge Senator Hillary Clinton's 2006 re-election bid even if GOP leaders ask her to step aside. State Republican party leaders are expected to discuss Pirro's fate tomorrow at a meeting in Albany. They could decide to draft her to run for Attorney General and suggest someone else challenge Hillary Clinton.
How much you wanna bet Ms. Pirro is toast? Not because she is not capable of being a good AG but, seriously, in this state women still get the fuzzy end of the lollipop politically speaking. Ms. Pirro not only has not proven her mettle fundraising but has a tax felong for a husband. There is no way with that last piece of baggage Madame Pirro could ever be elected to the post of the top prosecutor in the state.
Wanna be a candidate? Donâ€™t forget to bring your penis.- Old habits seemingly die hard on the other side of the aisle. Itâ€™s not really a secret that reactionaries generally favor a view of the world that assigns pretty clear roles to the genders â€“ the boys do the hard stuff, like earn the paycheck and run the country, and the girls, well, hey, honey, grab me a beer from the fridge, will ya sweetheart? What is kind of surprising â€“ well, no, not really â€“ is that this beer-and-cookies view of the way the world turns is now asserting itself in the Senate races. To wit, two non-penis-equipped persons are currently seeking Senate seats on the R ticket â€“ Katherine Harris and Jeanine Pirro. Both were considered superstars in their party â€“ until, I guess, they started to run for jobs that actually matter, like United States Senator. Today, both face immense party pressure to withdraw from their respective races. This from a party that thought nominating Alan Keyes in two races in two different states was a good idea â€“ the bar isnâ€™t set all that high. Now, a penis is a great thing to have. But, taking into account reasonable creativity, itâ€™s not clear that it has that many productive uses in the rarefied air of the United States Senate. Everyone knows that Elizabeth Dole has proven to be a disappointment for the other side, but really, guys, do you need to penalize the penisless? Remember: â€œscrewing the country
â€œOne way or another, Spitzer is going to pay for what heâ€™s done to me-
The Spitzer backlash begins
Tom Suozzi is a good man, with a solid record in government, a proven capacity to solve problems, an energetic campaign style, and a fertile mind full of good, practical ideas. He is a credible and attractive candidate for his all-but-declared gubernatorial run. Thereâ€™s a lot to like about this man. A lot, that is, other than his main backer, a Wall Street banker, billionaire and currently a defendant in a court case brought by the Attorney General of the State of New York. That Attorney General is of course Eliot Spitzer, declared candidate in the gubernatorial race and the man to beat at this stage in the game. The banker, septuagenarian Ken Langone, is profiled in this weekâ€™s
Scott Sala blows a gasket- Faithful Daily Gotham reader Scott Sala is up in arms. He appears not to like the fact that I mentioned a bad word - "penis" - in connection with his party, and specifically in connection with the demonstrable fact that anyone not equipped with a "penis" seems to be having a hard time, no pun intended, running for the Senate as an (R) this year. Well, Scott and his commenters have no truck with that insidious mirth at the expense of the "penis". There must be no discussion of any "penis" in the public sphere - unless that "penis" is attached to Bill Clinton.
Our worthy opponents stoop to a level of published discourse worthy of the porn websites from which they extract their political ideas.
Nicely put. Personally, I get most of my ideas from huge-communist-tatas.com, but that's just me. You know what's coming next. Wait for it, here it comes:
They get their sexual ideas from Bill Clinton, their role model in such matters!
Actually, in a sincere effort at bipartisanship, I now model myself on Jack Ryan, (R) of Illinois. Give me a sex club over a chubby intern any day. You with me, Scott? But there's more. With rising indignation, and in reference to my snarky suggestion that Pirro's problems are shared by another non-"penis"-wielding (R) candidate, Katherine Harris, Scott assures us there is no linkage between "penis" possession and party support. Oh, and us liberals are just big 'ol meanies.
[The Daily Gotham's] portrayal completely ignored performance of the campaigns and speeds into an ignorant attack on Republican men.
Actually, Scott, I'm aware of Pirro's performance - I derive much amusement from it. I get even more mirth from the fact that she is, indeed, the best you have in the vale of tears that 2006 is going to be for you
Taking a page from the Michale [sic] Moore School of Spin, Daily Gotham connects 2 coincidental dots, jumps to a wild conclusion and then delivers the blanket. Fortunately [,] DG [sic] has few readers [sic] to read this crap.
Fortunately, Scott has even fewer readers, aside, presumably, from those lost, forlorn and bitter souls who have no other social outlet than to peruse his blog. Life can be lonely for New York right-wingers, you know. I'm not even going to speculate on why the word "penis" arouses you to such ire, Scott. But it is Christmas. You have a very hard year ahead. Why such anger in the season of love, "penis" or no "penis"? [Update: Scottie, I realize that you think you're in a competition with this site - as evidenced by the penis-measuring contest you seem to want to embark on. And while I'm personally flattered to be quoted by you almost daily, honestly, from where I stand, you're more an object of affectionate amusement than of concern.]
George Patakiâ€™s incredible shrinking legacy- Itâ€™s pretty official at this point: George Pataki has left the building. No word yet on whether heâ€™ll physically establish residency in New Hampshire, or Iowa for that matter, but New York is not too high on his agenda. From the Daily News:
News flash! Several sources reported sightings of Gov. Pataki in New York City yesterday, but unfortunately these have not yet been independently verified since so few city residents are able to recall what he looks like. In the meantime, photos of the man in question have been sent to New Hampshire for identification. New Hampshire is where Pataki spent Wednesday night, while the transit-strike negotiations and the fate and future of millions of New Yorkers hung in the balance. He was up there pursuing his presidential ambitions. Priorities, you know.
Patakiâ€™s main legacy-building enterprise was to be a new and shining World Trade Center. In a sense, this will be true, and hereâ€™s why: the rebuilding process is characterized by muddle, indecision, cost overruns and really, an astonishing lack of any tangible results. To wit, the cornerstone of the new Freedom Tower was laid last year, in a nicely staged ceremony calculated to make Pataki and his struggling leader look good before a hard-fought election. Since then, true to the republican habit of pretending that photo-ops are an acceptable substitute for real policy, nothing has happened. The World Trade Center was destroyed 1,558 days ago. Pataki will leave office in 382 days. Itâ€™s probably with that timetable in mind that he handed $1.6 billion in Liberty Bonds to Larry Silverstein yesterday. The problem is that you canâ€™t just erase a few years of vacillation by throwing around billions. Nor can you compensate for what will, by the day he leaves office, have been two years of neglecting state business. At this rate, Patakiâ€™s legacy will be one that he likely had not contemplated: a Democratic sweep of the New York State elections next November. To put that into context: the last time Democrats held the governorship and controlled both houses of the legislature was after the election of 1934. Likely, George Pataki will deliver a legacy that this state has not seen in generations. Thank you, George. Now, about that possible transit strike...
Target: Sue Kelly- New York City Progressive activists are looking beyond the five boroughs to winnable legislative races around the state. The reason for this is simply the enormous local disparity between the resources available and the small number of targets. One such winnable race is in the 19th Congressional district, currently represented by Sue Kelly. Kelly is vulnerable on a number of fronts. The 19th district, when it was drawn in 2000, was already trending Democratic; today, the republican registration advantage has shrunk to under five percent, due in part to an influx of new voters from the City and to general disaffection with republican rule. On that issue, Kelly is perhaps most vulnerable: her votes are cast in lockstep with Tom DeLay's in 90% of cases, and she has taken $12,020 from ARMPAC, the indicted Texan's primary fundraising vehicle. Kelly's race, along with those of the other downstate House republicans being targeted â€“ Fossella and King â€“ is a prime candidate for issues nationalization. One leading indicator of winnability for this race is the number of contestants on the Democratic side. There are presently five candidates in the primary: - Judy Aydelott - John Hall - Jim Martorano - Darren Rigger - Ben Shuldiner The 19th district race is going to be interesting on several levels. The local Progressive coalition has established a blog dedicated solely to this race, Take 19, which will make it a test case for the use of grassroots blogs as information and activism platforms in local races. On another level, Kelly's district overlaps with other districts featuring vulnerable, targeted incumbents â€“ "Landslide Nick" Spano comes to mind â€“ which in turn likely will create synergy effects between the various campaigns being run in the area in 2006. Stay tuned.
Pirro's out- As many here predicted, Pirro has dropped out. Whether it is because she doesn't have a penis (sorry to all delicate Republicans, but that is the actual term for it!) or because she is just plain a loser or because (despite much far left and far right posturing) Hillary Clinton is just plain unbeatable it doesn't matter. The main thing is the insensitve scum who laughed it up at an NYPD officer's funeral is surrendering her humiliatingly failed Senate bid. It is unclear who will go up against Hillary Clinton now or whether Pirro will run for Attorney General. But clearly New York likes Hillary and does not like loser Republicans who can't respect our police officers even in death. Bye, bye Pirro. I for one won't miss you and it has nothing to do with your anatomy.
Thanks so much for the invite, Mr. Fundraiser- Hi Mr. Fundraiser, Thanks for inviting me to Mr. Candidate's fundraising event, but for now I have to decline. I am sure this is not going to be the only fundraiser for him, so please keep me in mind for future events. I actually met Mr. Candidate at a "New Democrat Movement" event and have given him the thumbs up among different bloggers here in NYC. We have discussed even the possibility of using BlogPac; and as a member of the ImpeachPACs steering committee, I've tossed his name around. That's why I am writing this post. You see, I am more useful to you as an evangelizer for candidates like Mr. Candidate than as a donor. The threshold for impacting politics has been lowered dramatically by the appearance of blogs in the media landscape. It does not mean there is no cost to it. It takes a lot of work, marketing and talent to do a good blog. But what it means is that bloggers and blogs are a whole different kind of resource. Blogs are not effective because they accelerate the spread of just content, information, data. They are effective because they can rapidly build or flatline reputations. An effective blog community is not a noise machine. An effective blog community is a reputation engine. That's why it is not enough for me to blog about Mr. Candidate and ask my community of readers to give him money. You need to prove to us you are one of us. You need to show us you share in on our social values and political principles. Landing in blogs here and there and asking for money is not enough. Being part of the communities we are building, that is part of the key of reaching out beyond the geographical boundaries of Mr. Candidate's Congressional District or your fundraising events. Either you as a fundraiser or the candidate themselves have to be part of my communities at The Daily Gotham and culturekitchen in order for people to understand or "get" why he is worthy of a donation. I have seen that Mr. Candidate has been diaring at one of the Big National Blogs to raise his visibility in the blogosphere. I have said to him and his staff that coming to NY-centric community blogs is probably one of the most important steps he needs to take. In my case, I am a blogger's blogger and that is where most of my sphere of influence extends to. Traffic statistics are not the only way to look at a blog's influence. You have to look at the bloggers and publishers of those blogs to understand their reach. Even though I think Big National Blog is a good start, I can't honestly say there are too many grassroots activist New Yorkers coming out of those blogs and jumping into action. Ask anybody at the several grassroots clubs and organizations here in New York City if there were throngs of New Yorkers coming out of the Big National Blog eager to work phone banks or hit the pavement for candidates. They will tell you they can count with one hand the amount of people who came out of those blogs. Why you may ask? National community blogs are reputation engines. Local community blogs act more like conductors of political action. They are not either or propositions. You need both. Big National Blog is a blog read by Washington insiders. That's why it's a good start for Mr. Candidate since it may gain Mr. Candidate visibility among the Washington crowd. To get people moved and eager to hit the pavement for him and move the grassroots? You need to go local. I tell you what Mr. Fundraiser, Mr. Candidate needs to focus on cross-posting on more New York political community blogs like this here blog. But let me get back to you Mr. Fundraiser. We need to talk. You need to get out more into the blogosphere. How you decide to engage as a political fundraiser, that is of your own making. What I would like to communicate in the most ... ahem ... gentle way I can is that you can't treat this as regular media or even regular internet media. Blogs are about community, about involvement and ultimately about action. The #1 mistake advertisers, marketers, political strategists and fundraisers make when hitting the blogosphere is to think of bloggers and readers as just consumers. We are a new economy. An economy being built on a currency of interactivity, trust and reputation. This is not a consumer economy; it's a creative economy. Still in its infancy but the matrix, the core is there. People gravitate to political blogs because they are view not as just publication but as politics in action. When was the last time you could have your comments of a newspaper article printed on the paper and ciruclated among all readers? Never. On a blog though you can comment on a post and that automatically adds you to the larger discussion. Blogs, diaries, comments, they augment us. Little itsy bitsy tech details like the ability to leave comments on a blog post is revolutionary. For the first time in generations, citizens have a way to effect politics by augmenting with their voice and their opinions a larger political discussion. People feel they are doing something; that they are not just watching passively and impotently. With interactivity, blogs are not about consuming information, they are about enhancing it, augmenting it and ultimately changing it. You and I know that comments on a blog are a very small part of actual political action. There are thousands of details and tasks that need to be attended to in politics and they mostly require money and people. But I want to stress how different this world of politics is online. To understand how the new economy of blogs works you need to be a creator, an investor and a worker. You need to get down and dirty here and work to make us part of your efforts. It's something to remember next time you invite me to one of your events; which I do hope to attend in the future. Thanks again for the invite and good luck with your event. In Peace and Prosperity, Liza Sabater, Publisher http://www.culturekitchen.com http://www.dailygotham.com
The Trafalgar Solution- The 2006 New York elections could become for Democrats what the battle of Trafalgar was to the British Empire two centuries ago â€“ the climactic victory that ushers in unchallenged supremacy. And just as a direct line leads from Trafalgar to Waterloo, this victory can lead to a new national Democratic ascendancy. Best of all, the republicans are cast in the role of the French. There are several notable strategic parallels, in the underlying alignment and relationship of forces, between the naval battle of 1805 and the electoral battle of 2006. First, Trafalgar solidified what was an accepted fact of life, British dominance of the high seas. Second, the Napoleonic navy was badly trained, badly divided, demoralized and ineptly led. Third, there was no recovery for the losing side â€“ ever. The same basic parameters apply to the political situation in New York State. It is an accepted fact of life that New York is a blue state, with a roughly 5:3 Democratic advantage in party registration over les republicains. The Quinnipiac poll recently pointed out that the baseline statewide republican vote is only 30%. In terms of training, coherence, morale and leadership, again, Democrats have a commanding lead over our opponents. Democratic organizations, both national and local, have used the time since the 2004 election to build an infrastructure statewide for empowering activists. Progressive organizations are working closely together to achieve common goals. Morale and motivation are high on our side, due to a confluence of national sentiment and state issues, such as Bush fatigue, Pataki fatigue, the obvious need for reform in the state legislature and the bleeding of the right over issues both foreign â€“ the Iraq war â€“ and domestic â€“ corruption, social security, pay to play politics, judicial extremism, governmental dishonesty, and so on. It seems safe to say that these factors will drive Democratic turnout to high levels, while simultaneously depressing the core republican vote. We expect that weâ€™ll see a replay of the 2004 elections; in New York, the anti-Bush backlash helped against republican candidates up and down the ballot. The key issue, however, will be leadership, and this is where the gap between the two sides is most pronounced. George Pataki is already spending more time in Iowa than Albany, which creates a leadership vacuum in the top-down structure of his state party. The slate of men running to succeed him, meanwhile, is flawed: Tom Golisano has run against Pataki three times, creating a yawning credibility gap should he get the nomination; Bill Weld, while superficially attractive, is tarred by scandals, near-incoherent in terms of policy positions, and unpopular with the right-wing base; while the last candidate, John Faso, a lobbyist, holds social views more appropriate to Utah than New York. The underlying weakness of the other side can be traced by the fate of the right-wing minor parties: the â€œright-to-life party
The swiftboating of Eliot Spitzer- There is a concerted, ongoing campaign to damage the Democratic front-runner in New York's gubernatorial race, State Attorney General Eliot Spitzer. At issue is a telephone conversation between Spitzer and the Pataki-appointed head of the LMDC, John Whitehead. Whitehead wrote an op-ed, some months ago, for the Wall Street Journal Op-Ed page, in which he harshly attacked Spitzer for what he described as prosecutorial misconduct. Cynics would say that Wall Street regards any investigation into its dealings as misconduct, or rather impudent effrontery. Subsequently to this editorial, Pataki appointee, Suozzi donor and former Reagan administration official Whitehead claims to have received a phone call from Spitzer â€“ it being a phone call, there are no witnesses â€“ in which Spitzer allegedly threatened to 'go to war' with him. Spitzer's office denies this charge; Spitzer has gone so far as to call Whitehead a liar. What followed is a textbook example of how swiftboating works in New York. The NYSRP demanded an investigation into the alleged threats on December 27th. Podhoretz over the Murdoch Post penned an Op-Ed the next day, in which he described Spitzer's 'shameless posturing', called him a 'thug' and a 'goon', while accepting the Whitehead allegations at face value. The extremist right-wing web site Newsmax.com hit into the same groove the same day. On January 3rd, Sean Hannity claimed that Spitzer had made a similarly threatening call to him in 2000. The Post carried this story on the next day. The Post followed up with another Op-Ed on January 4th. The letters in response to that appeared under the headline "Spitzer's tailspin". That same day, MSNBC's Charles Gasparino outlined the 'controversy' in a web-only piece. The New York Sun published another take on the 6th, titled "Spitzer denies threatening Whitehead", the body of which was so tepid it looked like an admission of guilt. And finally, the story made it into the mainstream media with an article published in the New York Times on January 7th. Spitzer's people, who presumably realized that they could not let these charges stand unanswered, noted that he is passionate about his beliefs. This is a classic example of how a story gets started, built up, and carefully fed, until it leaches from the various right-wing rags into the real media, who tend to report 'controversies'. No doubt, there will be more.
Hillary in Yonkers- The Daily Gotham received a rather interesting email from a tipster who wishes to remain anonymous. It concerns the speech scheduled for tomorrow by New York's junior Senator at the inaugural gala of the new Yonkers City Council President, Chuck Lesnick. Lesnick is the dragon-slayer who finally overthrew the corrupt Yonkers republican machine to establish a Democratic majority on the City Council there. The Yonkers machine, in turn, is the political base of what appears to be the latest non-entity striving to be the republican candidate for U.S. Senate, one John Spencer. Please note that we haven't been able to verify the specific claims made by our tipster as regards specific examples of criminality, and present this with that specific caveat.
Yonkers politics is very very interesting. Many forces are gelling around former Yonkers Mayor John Spencer getting the nod from the GOP to try to bloody Senator Clinton. Hillary is aware of this and is preparing a strategy which will not just hurt this specific opponent but will help to aid the entire national Democratic Party's electoral strategy for '06. And it involves a party she's going to right in the lion's den - Yonkers. Yonkers is known as [a] real hardball politics town. It's the 4th biggest city in NY but inept and criminal Republicans have hobbled its growth. And it's crazy corrupt. Ward (District) Leaders get found dead in the trunks of cars. Seriously. Judges too. There were high-level indictments just last year in the Mayor's office - ethics violations in the City Council left and right. The old Republican machine here is vicious and literally criminal. (This is where John Spencer comes from.) But. Here's the story: [...] Hillary is going to a big inaugural gala in downtown Yonkers, just across from City Hall for the new City Council President. Chuck Lesnick - he's this outsider Dem who ran a plainly anti-culture of corruption campaign. He talked also about the need for an honest[,] transparent government of qualified professionals and not political cronies. He railed against legacy six-figure salaried patronage jobs. His whole style of campaign was interlaced with a grassroots community involvement picture. [...] Dems now control the City Council for the first time in 20 years! Anyway, I understand that Clinton asked for a detailed Memo outlining all of the anti-corruption issues Lesnick raised during the campaign, all of his press releases and media advisories and Prepared Statements. That would imply that she is looking to quote him -- saying things she could easily say about any corrupt Republican - or a certain one from Yonkers - named John. I'm not the biggest Hillary fan but I think it's brilliant. Imagine Hillary, congratulating an underdog Democrat coming up from the community groups and PTA meetings, rising to fight a huge corrupt Republican machine, exposing its criminality, exposing its ineptitude [This] not only 1. serves the [inaugural gala] night, but 2. helps her race against John Spencer, and it also 3. helps every Dem whose campaign will mention their GOP opponent's connections to Abramoff and DeLay / extra-constitutional recess appointments / Brownie doin' a heck of a job and the whole 'Culture of Corruption' meme. [...] And because the things Lesnick said were pretty firebrand [...] her remarks might be very telling of things to come.
The press contact at Friends of Hillary, Sam Arora, says our tipster's idea is interesting, but incorrect. Democrats were rightly not too concerned about Jeanine Pirro's candidacy. The seeming coronation by default of John Spencer, if our internal party chatter is any indication, has turned that lack of concern into outright glee. His hardline reactionary views â€“ check out his web site, in which he proclaims himself "New York's true conservative" - are a gift in and of themselves, because those views don't resonate in this state. But since his candidacy makes the Yonkers cesspool a legitimate statewide campaign issue, he may wind up being the lever that brings the entire republican edifice crashing down. Maybe Hillary should reconsider. This could be juicy.
Hating Eliot- As the 2006 campaign begins, I find myself baffled by the volume and tone of the vitriol the right is throwing at Democratic gubernatorial front-runner Eliot Spitzer. I expected the minority party to go negative quickly, as their only hope for victory in this state rests on making the Democrat thoroughly unpalatable. However, the bitterness and viciousness of the attacks speaks of something larger. The right truly hates Eliot Spitzer. Hatred is actually a rare thing in politics. Bill Clinton was hated; Hillary still is, as are, on the other side of the spectrum, George Bush, Dick Cheney, and perhaps Tom DeLay. But that's about it. To find Eliot Spitzer in that kind of company is a surprising thing, to me at least. The thing about real, gut-wrenching, raw hatred is that it always has a component of the irrational, of treating the object as a symbolic template. There is also usually an undercurrent of fear. On the face of it, Eliot is an odd candidate for hatred. He's an aggressive prosecutor, yes, and he'll likely be a Progressive governor, although his issue positions are not as liberal as some of his supporters seem to think. In fact, his primary opponent â€“ Suozzi is going to announce an exploratory committee on Friday â€“ can be reasonably described as somewhat to his left. And yet, Tom Suozzi is drawing the support, for now at least, of some very unlikely figures, such as Ken Langone and, it seems, the right-wing New York blogosphere. I would hazard the guess, to do some amateur psychologizing, that the right, especially its more reactionary components, see in the crusading muckraker and slayer of CEO dragons Spitzer an archetype their own propaganda has told them to expect: the aggressive, hardline expropriator of property, a left-wing activist crusader with perhaps a whiff of the socialist about him. That alone would not necessarily be enough to arouse the kind of hatred Eliot now faces. However, Eliot also presents a real and credible challenge for the right, and poses a threat they have not faced since 1934: total defeat. This will be an interesting campaign season.
Campaign issue preview 2006: Non-partisan redistricting- Some day a legislative leadership with a sense of humor will push through both houses resolutions calling for the abolition of their own legislative bodies and the speedy execution of the members. If read in the usual mumbling tone by the clerk and voted on in the usual uninquiring manner, the resolution will be adopted unanimously. Warren Moscow, Politics in the Empire State, Alfred A. Knopf 1948 Due to sustained public pressure, exercised in part by Progressive activists from NDM and DFNYC, both houses of the New York State legislature finally adopted, in early 2005, a somewhat watered-down version of the reform package proposed by the Brennan Center for Justice. However, these reforms have not sufficiently addressed the reform needs of this state. The key to solving the lack of small-d democratic transparency is to abolish the incumbency protection racket that is the redistricting system. Presently, both houses of the legislature â€“ Senate and Assembly â€“ draw their own districts. Not surprisingly, given the seemingly permanent party majorities in both houses, this has led to an exquisite refinement in the art of gerrymandering; witness this map of City senate districts. Note how the districts of republicans â€“ Padavan (11), Maltese (15) and Golden (22) â€“ snake around, literally from block to block, in an effort to capture as many friendly voters as possible. The exception to that rule is the 24th district, which is republican enough to dispense with the kind of electoral filigree that sustains the three others. Another notable example of partisan craft is the 31st district, represented by Eric Schneiderman, which was re-drawn by the Senate majority to make the district far less demographically friendly to the Senator. The same methodology applies, needless to say, to the Assembly. In a very real way, this chicanery is illustrative of the larger ill that besets American democracy. For example, Democrats won 52% of the popular vote in House races in 2004, versus the republican's 44%; however, due to clever redistricting engineered in 2000 and later, the other side was able to expand its representation in the House. Partisanship aside, it is not a good thing in a representative democracy when legislators don't need to worry about their re-election prospects, since that worry is directly tied to their responsiveness to the expressed will of their constituents. It's also arguably not a very productive way of doing business when a given natural community of interest â€“ say, a neighborhood â€“ is divided between several legislative districts. Take, for example, the blocks that abut the 19th, 21st, 22nd, 23rd, and 27th districts in Bay Ridge. It's difficult to see how that area can secure adequate representation and a voice in its own affairs, to put it mildly. Democrats are already determined to make government reform a major issue in the 2006 state elections. Obviously, in a solidly blue state, this issue accrues to our partisan benefit. But that does not diminish the fact that it's also the right thing to do. New Yorkers deserve better than we're getting from Albany these days.
BREAKING: GOP to run Democrat for governor- The NY Post reports:
January 12, 2006 -- ALBANY â€” Republican leaders are secretly discussing endorsing Nassau County Executive Tom Suozzi for governor â€” even as Suozzi plans to announce tomorrow that he'll challenge Eliot Spitzer for the Democratic nomination, The Post has learned. Republican emissaries have already approached Suozzi about switching parties in order to enter the governor's race, party insiders said yesterday â€” and Suozzi himself confirmed it. "I told them I was a Democrat," Suozzi said when asked about the offer. Suozzi will announce formation of an "exploratory committee" to raise funds to run for governor against Attorney General Spitzer tomorrow. He repeatedly refused to say if he would consider remaining a Democrat while still running for governor on the Republican line. That's the scenario influential GOP activists want to pursue. "Suozzi is a proven vote-getter with Democrats and Republicans in the suburbs, and he could be a real threat to Spitzer running as a Democrat on the Republican ticket," said a top GOP insider. Former state GOP Executive Director Brendan Quinn said of a possible Suozzi candidacy, "An Italian Catholic Democrat from Nassau County would have real appeal to suburban voters, who are typically Republican."
True, the crop on the other side â€“ Weld and the weakly wannabes â€“ doesn't look too promising. But really, guys, can't you at least put up a fight? Or is Spitzer paranoia really that widespread?
11th Congressional District Candidates Forum- Lambda Independent Democrats will kick off the new year with a forum featuring the candidates for the hotly contested 11th congressional district seat being vacated by Major Owens on Thursday, January 26, 2006 at the Montauk Club, 25 8th Avenue at Lincoln Place. This is the first time in a decade that there will be an open congressional seat in Brooklyn, so join us in hearing from candidates Carl Andrews, Yvette Clarke, Chris Owens, Nick Perry and David Yassky. I want to add my personal comment on this race. Many Progressives love to complain about the weaknesses of the Democratic Party. Well, hotly contested primaries like this one are YOUR CHANCE to influence the Democratic Party. This race pits candidates linked to the corrupt machine against progressives and semi-progressives. People who complain about the party but fail to get involved on this level should just keep their mouths shut. Come help reform politics in Brooklyn by attending this forum and questioning these candidates yourself. Then support the candidate YOU like. Otherwise, I don't want to hear you complain.
DCCC outlines anti-corruption platform- The DCCC today released the following ethics blueprint for the federal government. Not too bad. Might be worthwhile putting together a comparable plan for New York to eliminate republican corruption in the executive branch and the State Senate, no? Or, for that matter, in Brooklyn â€“ which doesn't rise to the level of, say, Yonkers, but could use a thorough scrubbing. The Tony Rudy Reform: Close the Revolving Door. Close the revolving door between the Congress and lobbying firms by doubling (from one year to two) the cooling-off period during which lawmakers, senior Congressional staff, and Executive Branch officials are prohibited from lobbying their former offices. Eliminate floor privileges for former Members of Congress and officers of the Senate and House who return to lobby. WHY: Republicans' Revolving Door Lead to Criminal Activity. "Abramoff developed a close relationship with [DeLay] deputy chief of staff Tony Rudy. 'For all intents and purposes, Tony worked for Jack,' contends a former Abramoff associate, who tells TIME that Abramoff even bought Rudy a text-messaging pager so that they would never be out of touch...When Rudy left DeLay's staff in 2000, he joined Abramoff at the lobbying firm of Greenberg Traurig. Rudy now works for Buckham at Alexander Strategy Group, another lobbying operation." In addition, "Identifying [former Bob Ney Chief of Staff Neil] Volz only as 'Staffer B,' the Abramoff plea agreement suggests he may have lobbied Ney, members of his congressional staff and the House Administration Committee only one month after leaving a staff position on Ney's committee - far short of the one-year cooling off period required by law." [Time, 1/16/06; Copley News Service, 1/5/06] The Ralph Reed Reform: Toughen Public Disclosure of Lobbyist Activity. Significantly expand the information lobbyists must disclose - including campaign contributions and client fees. Require them to file disclosure reports electronically, and increase the frequency of those filings. Require lobbyists to certify that they did not violate the rules, and make them subject to criminal penalties for false certifications. WHY: Michael Scanlon and Ralph Reed Secretly Exploited Voters by Not Disclosing Clients. "Abramoff partner and former DeLay aide, Michael Scanlon, paid Ralph Reed $1.2 million to help oppose a new tribal casino that would compete with the casinos run by Abramoff's tribal clients." Ralph Reed used the money and his Christian Coalition network to raise grassroots opposition to the competing casino without disclosing to his followers that their anti-gambling efforts were being funded by a competing gambling interest. [Washington Post, 8/30/04] The Jack Abramoff Reform: Ban Lobbyist Gifts and Travel. Prohibit the receipt of gifts, including gifts of meals, entertainment and travel, from lobbyists. WHY: Lobbyists' Gifts Created Unethical Relationships Among Republican Congressmen. "First came the dinner invitations, then the tickets. Staffers in the office of former House Majority leader Tom DeLay could dine -- usually, free of charge -- at Signatures, the expense-account restaurant conveniently owned by lobbyist Jack Abramoff...the DeLay staffers began to think that Abramoff's box at the arena was their box, and, in the cozy way of Washington, it might as well have been." Abramoff also reportedly flew aides to Sen. Burns and Rep. DeLay to the 2001 Super Bowl and, during that trip, provided each with $500 worth of gambling chips on a SunCruz ship partly owned by Mr. Abramoff. [Newsweek, 1/16/06; Washington Post, 3/5/05; The Hill, 12/7/05] The Grover Norquist Reform: Shut Down Pay-to-Play Schemes Like the "K Street Project." End efforts like the "K Street Project," which Republicans created to tell corporations and lobbying firms whom they should hire in exchange for political access. WHY: Republicans Dictated Hiring at Corporations, Trade Associations and Lobbying Firms (?-xism:--) and let Special Interests Dominate the Republican Agenda in Return. "DeLay, Santorum, and their associates organized a systematic campaign, closely monitored by Republicans on Capitol Hill and by Grover Norquist and the Republican National Committee, to put pressure on firms not just to hire Republicans but also to fire Democrats. With the election of Bush, this pressure became stronger...Several Democratic lobbyists have been pushed out of their jobs as a result; business associations who hire Democrats for prominent positions have been subject to retribution." In addition, "while it's not uncommon for lobbyists to have a hand in writing legislation on the Hill, the Bush administration has sometimes shifted the locus of executive policy making so far towards K Street that Bush's own appointees are cut out of the process." [New York Review of Books, 6/23/05; Washington Monthly, July/August 2003] The Scully & Tauzin Reform: Disclosure of Outside Job Negotiations. Requires lawmakers to disclose when they are negotiating private sector jobs, and requires Executive Branch officials who are negotiating private sector jobs to receive approval from the independent Office of Government Ethics. WHY: Jack Abramoff Offered Lobbying Jobs to Congressional Staff for Helping his Clients on Legislation While Members and Executive Officials Took Lobbying Jobs After Regulating Industry. "Rep. W.J. "Billy" Tauzin, who exercised jurisdiction over the industry as chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee, will become president of the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America on Jan. 3, when he retires from Congress...As a committee chairman in 2003, Tauzin helped to write the law to provide outpatient prescription coverage under Medicare." Thomas Scully, the former head of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, held job negotiations with the same industries he regulated while also drafting the Medicare prescription drug bill. [Los Angeles Times, 12/16/04; GovExec, 4/9/04] The Frist & Hastert Reform: Prohibit "Dead of Night" Special Interest Provisions. Require that all conference committee meetings be open to the public and that members of the conference committee have a public opportunity to vote on all amendments. Make copies of conference reports available to Members, and post them publicly on the Internet, 24 hours before consideration (unless waived by a supermajority vote). WHY: Frist and Hastert Inserted a Special Interest Liability Provision in the Middle of the Night. According to Congressman David Obey, "The conference committee ended its work with the understanding, both verbal and in writing, that there would be no legislative liability protection language inserted in this bill...But after the conference was finished at 6 p.m., Senator Frist marched over to the House side of the Capitol about 4 hours later and insisted that over 40 pages of legislation, which I have in my hand, 40 pages of legislation that had never been seen by conferees, be attached to the bill. The Speaker joined him in that assistance so that, without a vote of the conferees, that legislation was unilaterally and arrogantly inserted into the bill after the conference was over in a blatantly abusive power play by two of the most powerful men in Congress..." [Congressional Record, 12/22/05] The Halliburton Reform: Zero Tolerance for Contract Cheaters. Restore accountability and openness in federal contracting by subjecting major contract actions to public disclosure and aggressive competition; criminally prosecuting contractors who cheat taxpayers, with penalties including suspension and debarment; imposing stiff criminal and civil penalties for wartime fraud on government contracting; prohibiting contractors with conflicts of interest from conducting oversight or writing contract requirements they could bid on; mandating full disclosure of contract overcharges; creating tough penalties for improper no-bid contracts; and closing the revolving door between federal contract officials and private contractors. WHY: No-Bid Contracts Bilked American Taxpayers. In March 2003, in what the top Army Corps contracting officer at the time has called the worst case of contracting abuse she ever witnessed, the Pentagon awarded Halliburton subsidiary Kellogg Brown & Root a no-bid contract to rebuild Iraqi oil fields and conduct "operation of facilities and distribution of products." The initial deal was thought to be worth as much as $7 billion dollars. Halliburton is the largest private contractor in post-war Iraq, with potential deals totaling well over $11 billion. It continues to receive major federal contracts despite over $1.4 billion in disputed billing charges and numerous other abuses. Before becoming Vice President, Dick Cheney served as Halliburton's Chairman. [Los Angeles Times, 5/7/03; Washington Post, 2/10/04; AP, 9/26/03] The Brownie Reform: Prohibit Cronyism in Key Appointments. End rampant cronyism by requiring that any individual appointed to a position involving public safety possess proven credentials, and training or expertise in one or more areas relevant to the position. WHY: Cronyism Led to Incompetence in Key Agencies like Michael Brown, the College Roommate of President Bush's 2000 Campaign Manager, who was Appointed to Head FEMA and Presided over a legacy of neglect at the agency. Like David Safavian, who was appointed to head the government's procurement office with no experience and was later arrested for lying to the FBI, Michael Brown was appointed to run FEMA without the requisite experience. According to Time, "this [second] Bush Administration had a plan from day one for remaking the bureaucracy, and has done so with greater success. As far back as the Florida recount, soon-to-be Vice President Dick Cheney was poring over organizational charts of the government with an eye toward stocking it with people sympathetic to the incoming Administration...Bush has gone further than most Presidents to put political stalwarts in some of the most important government jobs you've never heard of, and to give them genuine power over the bureaucracy. Some of the appointments are raising serious concerns in the agencies themselves and on Capitol Hill about the competence and independence of agencies that the country relies on to keep us safe, healthy and secure." [Time, 10/3/05]
Karl Rove runs out of ideas-
Meet the new campaign, same as the old campaign
The Washington Post reports on Karl Rove's speech to the RNC yesterday, in which he outlined the reactionary battle plan for the 2006 elections. Turns out it's a pretty familiar one:
White House Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove offered a biting preview of the 2006 midterm elections yesterday, drawing sharp distinctions with the Democrats over the campaign against terrorism, tax cuts and judicial philosophy, and describing the opposition party as backward-looking and bereft of ideas. "At the core, we are dealing with two parties that have fundamentally different views on national security," Rove said. "Republicans have a post-9/11 worldview and many Democrats have a pre-9/11 worldview. That doesn't make them unpatriotic -- not at all. But it does make them wrong -- deeply and profoundly and consistently wrong." Rove spoke at the winter meeting of the Republican National Committee and, with RNC Chairman Ken Mehlman, provided a campaign blueprint for fighting the Democrats. They spoke at the beginning of an important election year in which Republicans are battling historical trends, public unrest over Iraq and a spreading corruption scandal that together threaten to reduce the GOP majorities in the House and the Senate and possibly shift control of one or both chambers to the Democrats.
In short, Rove and the RNC are stuck in the moment of their greatest triumph, November 2004. They're going to face an uphill battle with this strategy, for the simple reason that for the rest of us, time has passed since their date of reference.
Aside from the fact that the DCCC has created buffers against the "soft on terrorism" meme by running dozens of combat veterans for the House, it's going to be difficult for the other side to turn dozens of legislative races and state races into referenda on national security. The linkage with the executive branch and its war-making powers isn't explicit enough, in my opinion, to carry that.
Two words: hurricane Katrina. That disaster and the ensuing catastrophic conditions shifted public perceptions of competence. Democrats can and will respond to a rah-rah terrorism campaign with counter-attacks on the rot that is the homeland-security apparatus.
Iraq: all the rhetoric flowing like warm molasses from the White House and its media arm notwithstanding, it' going to be difficult to shill that disaster as something worth emulating going forward. This will become especially clear if the confrontation with Iran escalates. Simply put, because of the wear and tear on the U.S. military as a result of the war, we're unable to do much of anything about other threats; the truth is that the Baghdad adventure has reduced our military capabilities to an egregious degree.
Abramoff. Legislative corruption has historically trounced other campaign issues; consider the 1994 midterms, when healthcare and the economy were the issues the conventional wisdom thought would be decisive; they weren't.
Judicial nominations: The emerging Democratic strategy against Alito seems to be paying off, the monstrously botched hearings notwithstanding, and should prove effective against this tactic. We've successfully shifted the focus from executive privilege â€“ aided in no small part by Bush's collapsing poll numbers â€“ to ideology. However, solid majorities of Americans are with us on the contentious, litmus-test issues of choice, privacy, and so on. If judges are a mainstay of the 2006 RNC strategy, again, they may not have been paying attention since 2004.
Schneiderman versus Bruno- Eliot Spitzer's selection of David Paterson as his running mate is presently sending ripples through the political establishment. I'd hazard the guess that these will soon be quieted, which leads to the next question: who will lead State Senate Democrats in the battle to capture the majority in that body this November? My money is on Eric Schneiderman - web site - the current deputy Minority Leader. If he's elected, which seems as safe a bet as any, Schneiderman's aggressive efforts to dethrone the Eisenhower-era republican patriarchs in the Senate will take center stage. In terms of strategy, the selection of Paterson makes good sense all around, and not just because of his compelling biography. The selection of the Senate minority leader for the lieutenant governor's spot â€“ considering that running on a ticket with the front-runner is tantamount to victory â€“ will put the concerns of that chamber squarely in the focus of the gubernatorial campaign. I've been saying for months that only unified control of the state government â€“ governor and both houses of the legislature - will usher in the new Progressive era that this state wants. The selection of Paterson shows that Spitzer understands this as well. If we want governor Spitzer to be effective, we need to wrest away control of the state senate from the well-gerrymandered holdovers of the Eisenhower era. If we don't, Spitzer will be hobbled by having to negotiate and compromise with Joe Bruno. 2006 is the year for a clean sweep. Eliot Spitzer will be the next governor. Eric Schneiderman wants to be Majority Leader. If these two work together, this state will enter a new era.
Trying just a bit too hard- Is there life after political death? One of the commenters over at Urban Elephants, the ever-hardy Scott Sala, seems to think so, judging by his most recent, quite chivalrous, paean to the campaign of Jeanine Pirro. You may remember Jeanine; she's the former Senate candidate whose campaign was none too gently euthanized by Joe Bruno and the entire party establishment. For the moment, she appears to be running for Attorney General, but that may very well change, if past is precedent. But read for yourself â€“ here's the quote with interspersed commentary. Jeanine Pirro, who many thought dead in her own GOP shark infested waters... Yes, that is the general consensus. ...has re-surfaced in glamorous fashion... This reference is to a Rensselaer County fundraiser, as published on CapitolCentral.com. Glamorous indeed. ...bruised but buoyed by a growing school of influential fish. Which is presumably a nice way â€“ as I said, this is quite the chivalrous piece â€“ of saying "her credibility shattered, reduced to a laughingstock, still married to a felon, Jeanine is now trawling desperately for a nod from people who don't matter or don't care." She's gaining on Cuomo in the polls and is racking up endorsements like crazy. Yes, according to Zogby, she's now only 11 points behind one of the Democratic candidates, as opposed to being 18 points behind. In real numbers, she's at 34% to 45% for Cuomo â€“ who's not my first choice for AG, but hey â€“ in a blue state. Mind you, that's an improvement of four points over her performance versus Hillary - but it's still well short of anything that exudes the sweet smell of victory. As to endorsements, given Huey/Mike Long's comments on her during her previous campaign, which fell just short of calling for her to be burnt at the stake, I kinda doubt she'll be getting the only endorsement that matters, in the way that these things matter for New York righties. And even if she does, it won't matter.
The Leftist Thirst for Blood: Seeing the "Vichy 10" in Perspective- The thirst for blood from the left against the so-called "Vichy 10" is sweeping several blogs and I have to say I find it kind of repulsive. It is the kind of knee jerk reaction, poorly thought out and poorly expressed, that I expect from Bush supporters talking about Clinton's blowjobs. And some of my fellow leftists sure don't like me saying this. Got scolded considerably at My Left Wing for advocating a touch of restraint. I understand people's frustration. But JESUS CHRIST PEOPLE! HAVE SOME PERSPECTIVE! Some of the people you want to target have among the best voting records in Congress on environment, labor and choice. Do we REALLY want to start by targeting those people??? The so-called â€œVichy 10
Ghosts of campaigns past- Yes, old campaigns don't die; they just retire to CafÃ©Press.com. But what to say about the new campaign, honestly, I do not know.
Suggestions for a grassroots political strategy: 2006- Any analysis of the 2006 election in New York needs to start with one basic premise: there is no real opposition left on our home turf. Only one other-party nominee â€“ Jeanine Pirro â€“ polls at more than 30% in a statewide race; we are set to sweep those races, through a combination of good candidates and extensive preparation, without really making that much of an additional grassroots effort. The same is true, obviously, of the United States Senate race, where Hillary also faces no real opposition. So, what to do? The baseline assumption I work from is that we face two separate but related challenges: electing more Democrats, and making elected Democrats more Progressive. I would argue that of these two goals, 2006 is the year to pursue the former first and foremost; making our own electeds better servants of the people, while eminently desirable, should in my opinion wait until we've recaptured majorities where it matters: The House, the United States Senate, the State Senate. It really is a zero-sum game in my view; the energy and money expended on primary challenges is not available for dealing with the real problem, which is the other party. I have yet to see a single Democrat who is as bad as the alternative from the other side, and that includes Joe Lieberman. I would suggest that New Yorkers do what we did in 2004, which is direct our actions into making our own state bluer, and to seek out races at a reasonable distance from the City where our work, time and money can have an impact. Here are some worthy targets:
The State Senate
Joe Bruno is already in the midst of what can reasonably be described as a public meltdown. Interesting targets in the Senate include Nick "Landslide" Spano, Marty Golden, Messrs Padavan and Trunzo, not to mention the entire raft of senators clinging to office on Long Island. Four more seats, and it's ours.
The House of Representatives
In terms of the House races, it truly is a mixed bag. The most vulnerable targets, King and Fossella, presently lack credible challengers in my view. That fact truly stands as a crying shame; both are beatable, but perhaps this is not the year. Other races of note are taking place in less hospitable terrain, such as the 19th, 29th, 25th and a few selected other districts. But given that Democratic challengers have delivered competitive races in the two most vulnerable districts on half a shoestring, this diagnosis may be premature. That said, New Yorkers should consider the 50+ veterans running for office across the country. Their PAC is here, donations are accepted here. Another pickup opportunity is perennial target, Christopher Shays. In terms of Democratic primaries, the most inviting ones are taking place in our very own 11th district, and in the 19th district in Westchester.
United States Senate
We are within reach of a number of enticing options. Rhode Island, Pennsylvania, and Ohio all have seats that can be picked up. Some people have mixed feelings about the PA candidate, Bob Casey, due to his views on choice; my argument with that view is that the yardstick that should be applied is whether he's a vast improvement over his opponent. He is, so let's help the man. Some activists are also casting a glance across the river to the New Jersey race, where newly installed Senator Menendez has looked a bit shaky of late.
Gubernatorial races
The interesting races in New England and the mid-Atlantic states include Massachusetts, Ohio, Maryland, Vermont, Rhode Island and Maine. Connecticut, alas, seems lost, despite the corruption scandal that forced governor Rowland into the federal penitentiary, due to the massive popularity and frankly admirable governing style of his replacement, Jodi Rell. That said, we can pick up up to ten governorships this year, which might just be the biggest opportunity of all â€“ redistricting! â€“ to tilt the national balance decisively in our favor.
Media activism
One of the largest challenges facing Progressives is the hostile media environment. We live in the media capital, and we're in a good position to exert pressure on the media to present our point of view fairly. It would be worthwhile to put together a media strike force to deal directly with egregious examples of anti-Progressive bias in the media.
Fundraising
New York City generated over $300 million for the 2004 effort. We can top that. Money remains the holy grail of politics, alas, and we need it as much as the party of plutocracy does, perhaps more. That said, the grassroots need to start cultivating ties to donors that can really raise cash; itty-bitty little fundraisers that charge $5 at the door are all very well and good as a civic exercise, but that's not how you raise real money. So there you have it: a roadmap to victory.
Memo to all 2006 candidates : Real Democrats do not support forced pregnacies- I published this over at culturekitchen | Dear Vichy Democrats and Republicrats : You leave me no choice but to kick your sorry pregnacist asses out of my government. I think it's worth repeating here given I mention Eric Massa.
This morning I sent a bunch of emails to several feminist and pro-choice bloggers on the matter of Matt Brown. Right after the Alito confirmation I sent an email to Matt Burguess, Matt Brown's communications director. I've been receiving their press releases probably like everybody maybe many other political bloggers all around the country. I am fed up with what I think is a lack of vulvas, not cojones, effecting the political discourse around choice. We need more feminists raising money, evaluating and promoting candidates, getting on the TV and radio and newspapers and the net and blasting over and over and over again that forced pregnancies are anti-American, that forced pregnancies are a new kind of slavery, that forced pregnancies are a fundamental crime against humanity. We need to have more women speak like this publicly to all candidates, Democrats and Republicans. I was introduced here in New York City to Eric Massa, an upstate New York candidate running for Congress. I was very happyt to know he's running against Randi Kuhn, a Republican who has been taking tons of money and support from the extreme right with organizations like Focus on the Family and the Homeschool Legal Defence Association. But then, he lost me. When I asked Mr. Massa how we stood on abortion he flubbed, he fumbled, he totally ho-hummed.
ImpeachPAC Endorses Chris Owens (NY-11)- Chris Owens, already endorsed by progressives like Dennis Kucinich and Maxine Waters, has picked up another strongly progressive endorsement. From ImpeachPAC:
Congress is full of followers. But to impeach George Bush and Dick Cheney, we need real leaders. That's why ImpeachPAC is endorsing Chris Owens in the open race for Brooklyn's 11th Congressional District. On January 23, Owens declared his support for impeachment on his web site: "As an American committed to the vigorous protection of individual rights in a democratic society, I join with the voices both within and outside of Congress calling upon the U.S. House of Representatives to commence impeachment proceedings against the President of the United States." Three days later, Owens argued vigorously for impeachment at an important candidates forum. His powerful advocacy produced banner headlines in the Brooklyn Paper, stating simply "IMPEACH BUSH!" Wouldn't it be great to see headlines like that in the New York Daily News - or the New York Times? If we can elect Chris Owens to Congress, great things are possible. In calling for impeachment, Owens - like Richard Nixon's former White House Counsel John Dean - stressed Bush's open admission he broke the strict FISA law, while claiming he has vague legal powers that put him above the law. Owens told the Brooklyn audience, "By his own admission, he violated the law [by authorizing the surveillance of Americans]. He has dared us - he has dared us! - to define his violations as a high crime and misdemeanor." Can we ignore such a dare? Of course not! Owens is wise to the anti-democratic tactics of the White House and the Republican-controlled Congress, and says we need to hold Bush accountable immediately. "The situation we confront today highlights the dangers of one-party dominance of the three branches of our government. This is particularly dangerous since the current dominant party has chosen to use fear itself as a political and psychological club, cudgeling the people into acquiescence as our rights are eroded... Resolving the issues raised by the President's actions is time-sensitive and requires a comprehensive response. Completing the journey to truth, therefore, requires us to cross the desert of impeachment." Owens approaches impeachment with appropriate caution. "Impeachment is not synonymous with conviction. In fact, no President has ever been removed from office as a result of a conviction by the United States Senate. Impeachment is a Constitutional check on the Executive Branch. In this matter, impeachment will clarify important homeland security and civil liberties issues and either prove the abuse of Presidential power ... or conclude that none occurred." But for Owens, caution does not mean the question of impeachment should be avoided. Instead, it is a question that must be confronted head-on. " We must reach the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth... Congress must act now... This call for impeachment is about saving America -- the land of the free." Owens comes by his deep progressive convictions honestly. His father, Major Owens, graduated from Atlanta's Morehouse College at the height of the civil rights movement, became a librarian, and moved to Brooklyn, where he became a community activist. He served 8 years in the State Senate, then succeeded the legendary Shirley Chisholm in Congress 1982. Major Owens is well-known to C-SPAN viewers for his passionate speeches on behalf of progressive causes, and his voting record is equally progressive. Chris Owens is proud to call himself an "aggressive progressive" - just like Democrats.com. Chris is a member of Progressive Democrats of America, where we began discussing impeachment a year ago. Chris is passionate about reforming the Democratic Party, starting right at home with the ossified Brooklyn Democratic machine. Owens has been endorsed by some of the most progressive Members of Congress, including Maurice Hinchey (NY), Stephanie Tubbs Jones (OH), Dennis Kucinich (OH), John Lewis (GA), Bernie Sanders (VT), and Maxine Waters (CA). Brooklyn's 11th District, which voted 86% for John Kerry, is a safe Democratic seat. The important battle is the September Democratic primary, in which Owens will face 4 other candidates. Although the district is nearly 60% black, the leading fundraiser in the race is City Councilman David Yassky, who is white - and does not support impeachment. Polls show impeachment is a top issue for Democrats who vote in primaries. A recent Zogby poll commissioned by OpEdNews.com found 85% of Democrats would be likely to vote for a candidate who "supports having impeachment proceedings against President Bush." http://www.democrats.com/node/7556 To help close the fundraising gap, ImpeachPAC will give Chris Owens the maximum of $5,000: $2,100 now and $2,900 when we qualify as a multi-candidate PAC in April.
If you want to join Kucinich, Maxine Waters, Bernie Sanders and ImpeachPAC in supporting Chris Owens, please donate to support this wonderful progressive.
Exclusive: ImpeachPAC endorses Chris Owens (NY-11)- ImpeachPAC, a national Political Action Committee dedicated to the impeachment and removal from office of George W. Bush, today announced that its second endorsement in this cycle will go to Chris Owens, who is running for the vacant congressional seat in New York's 11th district. The Daily Gotham is a big booster of Owens, so we're obviously pleased as hell about this. We spoke to Chris this morning to congratulate him â€“ the endorsement comes with a nice fat $5,000 check, which is always helpful â€“ and to get his reaction. He had this to say: "I'm obviously pleased to get the endorsement of ImpeachPAC. I also hope that many more candidates, incumbents and challengers both, will join this movement". Amen. Bob Fertik, of ImpeachPAC wrote us an email explaining the endorsement decision. I like Chris's words better than mine. At a candidates forum, Chris emphasized Bushâ€™s wiretapping scandal. â€œBy his own admission, he violated the law. He has dared us â€“ he has dared us! â€“ to define his violations as a high crime and misdemeanor.
Mayor Mike, unleashed- Michael Bloomberg has always been something of a political anomaly. He started out as a registered Democrat; switched parties in mid-2001, essentially purchasing the GOP standard for a better run at the top office; proceeded to invite both parties to hold their conventions in New York (the Democrats, with our usual surefooted dance away from the obvious, chose Boston instead); gave great gobs of cash to George W. Bush, whom I'm pretty sure our meritocratic mayor does not hold in high personal esteem; opposed nearly every Bush policy that affected New York; passed the most damning judgment possible on the administration's anti-terror effort by empowering the NYPD to create its own muscular and well-funded intelligence service; and then got himself re-elected by a thunderous margin by governing largely as a Democrat. What this demonstrates is a deft political dexterity that can't be described by conventional criteria, including the over-used term triangulation. The mayor has elbowed aside the lame-duck Pataki administration on redeveloping Ground Zero â€“ in a display of the typical republican lack of competence, there's not much to show there, more than four years after the attack â€“ and is now, according to The New York Times, considering taking on a republican Senator in Queens. That Senator, Serphin Maltese, had the bad taste, from the view of the mayor, to actively promote the quixotic candidacy of Thomas Ognibene for the party nomination last year. The truly interesting thing is that this is not necessarily your standard political payback; Bloomberg has been at odds with Senate Majority Leader Bruno for a while over the latter's refusal to adequately fund city schools and other Bloomberg goals. The long and the short of it is that we City residents fund, via a process commonly known as 'getting screwed', the public welfare that keeps Bruno and his upstate henchmen in power. The mayor is sick of it, rightly. A Democratic Senate majority will see to it that the City receives an equitable share of state resources. Therefore, the mayor has an ex officio interest in switching control of the chamber away from his own party. It will be interesting to watch the ongoing political maturation of Michael Bloomberg in light of the Democratic tide sweeping this state, and the nation, in this election year. Based on his track record and ability to align himself advantageously, I'll predict two things: a) Bloomberg will endorse and campaign for Eliot Spitzer. b) If the Democrats sweep the state and national elections, Bloomberg will switch parties in early 2007, either re-registering as a Democrat or as an Independent. I've heard consistent rumors for a while now, from usually knowledgeable sources, that both scenarios are likely. Just remember, you read it here first.
Ned Lamont ponders the future- Up in Hartford, Ned Lamont is mulling a run against Joseph Lieberman, the poster child for selling capitulation as bipartisanship. The Hartford Courant reports that Lamont isn't entering the race until he has 1,000 volunteers signed up from within the borders of the Constitution State. That seems sensible. It's my personal opinion, not widely shared at the netroots, that 2006 is not a year for primary challenges, because the tide is so clearly running against the real problem in the shape of the fragile reactionary majority. But for Lieberman, who seems to relish selling out his party, his constituents and everything I hold dear, an exception might have to be made.
Fighting Corrupt Republicans in NYC- According to the
Brooklyn Politics: The race for NY-11 Congressional Seat- The race to replace Major Owens as the Congressional Rep. from Brooklyn's 11th Congressional district may start to get interesting. What is at stake in this race is not whether this district will be represented by a Dem or a Repub. Sorry to New York's Reds, but NY-11 is so solidly blue that the local Democratic Party machine could probably run a sponge cake and it would still beat any Republican candidate. No, what is at stake is what kind of Democrat will represent us: a machine sponge cake, a reformer or what? In a sense, this race is about the identity of the Democratic Party with race, corruption and socially progressive issues being part of the mix. So far the candidates have had one debate, sponsored by Brooklyn's reform club Lambda Independent Democrats and covered in the Feb. 4th issue of the Brooklyn Paper. The cast of characters, which looks to be decreasing soon, includes the following: Chris Owens: son of Major Owens and the darling of the progressive community, endorsed by Dennis Kucinich, Maxine Waters and Impeach PAC. Worries of a political "dynasty" and experience dog Chris, but Chris is the only candidate to come off leader-like and who stands out as a candidate with vision. He was described as "preacher-like and well-informed" at the Lambda debate by the Brooklyn Paper. So far, though, he can't raise the money it takes to get his voice heard in modern politics. Advocating impeachment, marriage equality, and withdrawal from Iraq, Chris is solidly the progressive, grassroots candidate. The Brooklyn grassroots is notoriously slow to get moving in a political campaign. So it remains to be seen if taking the path of progressive idealism will win this one for Chris. Nick Perry: the loser candidate from Brooklyn's corrupt Clarence Norman...make that Vito "Lopez is not my real last name" Lopez...political machine. All rumors point to Nick Perry dropping out as soon as he can. Perhaps Perry is the machineâ€™s sponge cake candidate and in this race the Dems donâ€™t need to resort to someone like him. Looks like no one will miss him, when he quietly drops out to face Wellington Sharpe, who is gunning for Nick Perryâ€™s Assembly seat. Carl Andrews: the REAL candidate from Brooklyn's corrupt political machine. Despite being tainted by his association with Clarence Norman's corruption, he comes in second in fundraising for now. Like the Brooklyn machine in general, Andrews came off at the Lambda debate as uninterested in the voters, arriving more than an hour late. He also showed his disdain for the audience when he had to read his record on gay and lesbian issues from his own press release...and this was at an event SPONSORED by Brooklyn's gay and lesbian Democratic Club! Bad form, Carl, bad form! I also notice that Andrews' State Senate website is clearly neglected. Nothing to tell your constituents? Rumors are now flying that Carl Andrews may be leaving the race for NY-11 to stay in the State Senate and become minority leader...which translates to majority leader if it looks like the Dems can take the State Senate. The machine may step out of this race, which, given the strength of the reform vote particularly in Park Slope, may be wise. So, who would the machine endorse...? David Yassky: the only white candidate, hoping to pick up the Park Slope vote while the black candidates split the votes of the rest of the district. This is a cynical but perhaps realistic strategy. Described as "wonkish" by the Brooklyn Paper, Yassky courts the progressive and reform vote, but fails to take solid stands, preferring to triangulate in the true Clinton/Schumer tradition. Again, a cynical yet, perhaps, winning strategy. Yassky's chances of taking the reform Dem standard from Chris Owens were lost when in 2005 Yassky endorsed uber-corrupt candidate for Brooklyn DA, John Sampson. Sampson was the machine-picked candidate who promised to "review" the Clarence Norman indictments. Remember that those indictments later led to Norman's conviction for corruption. Yassky's endorsement of Sampson linked him, despite his claims to be a reform Dem, to the same corrupt machine that Nick Perry and Carl Andrews represent. Could it be that Yassky's endorsement of Sampson was made to win the machine's support in the case of Andrews dropping out? If so, once again a cynical yet possibly winning strategy. Yassky, with his links to rich, white Park Slope, is way ahead in fundraising. Cynicism is paying off in this race! Yvette Clarke: the only woman in the race since Tracy Boyland dropped her bid. For Yvette Clarke this is a grudge match: the Clarkes and the Owens families have a feud going and the Clarkes are constantly trying to unseat the Owenses. I hope that Clarke has more interest in this race than just a way to get back at Major Owens for past history. Perhaps not since the Brooklyn Paper described her performance at the Lambda event as "light on substance." The Clarkes also have past connections with Pataki and state Republicans. No one questions their legitimacy as Democrats, but as the person who is neither with the machine nor for reform, Clarke seems to have little support. The lack of a campaign website (other than her city council site) may indicate that Yvette, too, will be dropping out. With Nick Perry and, quite possibly, Carl Andrews poised to drop out, the big question is who will get the machine support? Or will the machine sit this one out? Clearly David Yassky was angling for machine support back in 2005 when he angered his own base by endorsing the machine's candidate for Brooklyn DA. It is my guess that if or when Carl Andrews drops out, Yassky will receive his nod from the machine, but it will be lukewarm support at best. Yet, with a lukewarm nod from the machine and with the financial backing of the wealthiest in the district, this may become Yassky's race to lose. Yvette Clarke, who is often described as being earnest but distant from her constituents, really needs to establish a base of support. An old grudge against Major Owens does not make a political career. And, in NY-11, neither does past connections with Governor Pataki. Short of a miracle, I do not see Yvette Clarke as winning this race. Chris Owens has his name going both for and against him. Name recognition is a huge benefit on a ballot, but there is also an undercurrent of resentment at a dynastic bid for the seat. However, I would argue that Chris' name should neither guarantee his victory nor disqualify him. Chris is his own man and should be judged as such. Most who hear him and so judge him become followers, the result, perhaps, of his "preacher-like and well informed" delivery. He is both inspiring and intelligent, as well as idealistic. What he lacks right now is money. The grassroots of Brooklyn can prove their worth by winning this race for Chris. They failed to win much last year, but if they do get their act together, Chris Owens could win both the reform voters who Yassky betrayed and the progressives who are aching for a candidate they can be passionate about. That, with his name recognition, could win it for Chris.
Eric Massa gets a challenger- Roll Call (subscription) reports that a second Democrat has entered the House race against "Shotgun Randy" Kuhl, the incumbent in the 29th District; Kuhl bears this nickname because of an incident alleged in his divorce papers.
An executive of the Bausch & Lomb eye products company on Monday joined the Democratic race for the right to take on freshman Rep. Randy Kuhl (R). David Nachbar, a Cornell University graduate and vice president of the eye care company, becomes the second major Democrat in the 29th district race, denying Eric Massa, a retired Navy officer and former top aide to retired Gen. Wesley Clark, a clear path to the nomination. Nachbar, a child of working-class German immigrants, worked in a factory while he was in college and plans to use that experience to appeal to voters in a district that has been hard hit by plant closings. â€œAs a Member of Congress I will fight for the economic renewal we need and deserve, protect our families and children and be an ethical, independent voice for Western New York,
Show Your Support for Chris Owens- For Brooklyn's progressive Democrats, there is no political race this year more important than in the 11th District to succeed Congressman Major Owens. We have an opportunity to elect someone who is courageous, bright, compassionate, articulate, a good listener, and a very good friend to us all â€“ Chris Owens. Chris is right on the issues that we care about, and he is the ONLY one of the five declared candidates who has shown the foresight and the guts to oppose Bruce Ratnerâ€™s Atlantic Yards development scheme. Anybody who saw him debate his four opponents at the Lambda Independent Democrats meeting last month can tell you that no candidate is more outstanding than Chris Owens. But Chris cannot get to Congress without our help. Thatâ€™s why Iâ€™m inviting you to join Chris and his staff for a short get-together at Magnetic Field on Tuesday, February 21, at 7:00 pm. Chris will give a short speech and then answer any questions you may have for him. Please come out to see what you can do to help elect Chris, and please bring your checkbooks. Magnetic Field (that's where we used to host the Howard Dean meetups) is located at 97 Atlantic Avenue (between Henry & Hicks Streets). Directions: Take the 2, 3, 4, or 5 train to Borough Hall, or the R or M to Court Street, and then walk down Court to Atlantic Avenue (4-6 blocks) and turn right and walk 2-3 blocks. Or take the F or G to Bergen Street, walk up Smith Street and turn left onto Atlantic and walk 3-4 blocks. And if you're coming from Williamsburg or Greenpoint, take the B61 Bus to Atlantic and get off near Magnetic Field. Please RSVP. I hope to see you there. Bring all of your friends. If you can't attend, please make a contribution.
Suozzi to make announcement on Saturday- The Politicker alerts the world to an upcoming announcement, this Saturday, from Tom Suozzi. What, oh what will it be? Is this bumpersticker just a malicious accident?
Suozzi: the Beneficiary of Big Business Grudges Against Spitzer- I am not necessarily a fan of Eliot Spitzer. I have heard both good and bad about him and have largely accepted him as our candidate for Governor because he seems pretty unbeatable in the primary. But, of course, Tom Suozzi has now announced that he will be challenging Spitzer in the primary. I know little about Suozzi, but from what I am hearing he is little more than the beneficiary of various grudges against Spitzer and not really a viable alternative, at least from the point of view of progressives. From the NY Times:
Thomas R. Suozzi, the Nassau county executive and a self-styled renegade Democrat, announced Saturday that he was challenging Attorney General Eliot Spitzer for his party's nomination for governor, running as an underdog who will rely to an unusual degree on businesses leaders who have been sued by Mr. Spitzer and New Yorkers who dislike his tacticsâ€¦ Of his $5 million on hand, more than $1 million has come with the help of business leaders like Kenneth G. Langone, the co-founder of Home Dep

The Daily Gotham

2006 Elections

2006 Elections

The Spitzer backlash begins

Meet the new campaign, same as the old campaign

The State Senate

The House of Representatives

United States Senate

Gubernatorial races

Media activism

Fundraising