Ron Mills- News And Commentary

Why does the Tea Party hate American Workers

2010-09-06T09:12:00.000-04:00

First, they voted against the Democrats' economic stimulus plan. Then they voted against expanding health care to working families and cutting Medicare costs for seniors. And against keeping teachers and police on the job. Then they held up unemployment benefits for millions of Americans who had earned them!

Now the Tea Party Republicans have a plan to increase unemployment if they take back control of Congress in November.

How will they do it?

1. Cut federal investment in green jobs, public services, and small business lending

2. Cut taxes for the rich just like George W. Bush did.

3. Unleash Wall Street speculators and big corporations to ship jobs outside the United States.

We have just eight weeks to stop them!

Whether you're unemployed today -- or will be if the Tea Party Republicans take control of Congress -- you can help!

The Tea Party Republicans may have the big money, but we have the people.

Each of us can help by spending even a few hours calling voters or knocking on doors for Democrats who block the Tea Party Republican plans.

21st Century Democrats endorses candidates who share our vision of party and country, one that puts ordinary people first. To learn about our candidates, click here.

You can help stand up Democrats all over the country, even if they are not in your community. You can make phone calls at no cost or make a small contribution. To contribute, click here.

Will you work with us to protect jobs?

All you need to do is click here. And we'll connect you with campaigns for stand up Democrats who need your help.

Everyone can help. It doesn't matter if you're retired, unemployed, or still working. And share this invitation with friends and relatives, young people who haven't been able to find a job yet, retired people who are experienced volunteers and friends who ask "What can I do to stop the Tea Party Republicans?"

Click here to work for jobs

Sincerely,

Jim Scheibel, Chair

Contact Information
Phone: 202-626-5620

Website: 21st Century Democrats

	Paid for by 21st Century Democrats 1133 19th Street, NW, 9th Floor Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 736-5775 www.21stcenturydems.org Not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee.

Why,Mario Diaz-Balart and Lincoln Diaz-Balart rejected Charlie Christ

2009-12-23T06:37:00.002-05:00

Reps. Mario Diaz-Balart and Lincoln Diaz-Balart, who are leading figures in the Cuban-American GOP political community, have rescinded their endorsements of Crist. Lincoln Diaz-Balart wouldn't elaborate on the reason, except to give this cryptic comment: "We take our endorsements seriously, but the governor knows why we withdrew and he left us with no alternative."

The Miami Herald speculates that this might have happened because Crist snubbed the Diaz-Balarts in their attempt to have a friend of Lincoln's son appointed as a judge, instead picking a different candidate. Could something this picayune have led to a retraction of a Senate campaign endorsement?

Social Media Consulting, Web Presence,
Call Center Technology
Book A FREE 1/2 Hr. Phone Consultation

Media Sticks it's head up John McCain's ASS a usual

2009-12-20T10:02:00.002-05:00

When Sen. Al Franken denied Sen. Joe Lieberman's request for unanimous consent to speak beyond his allotted 10 minutes during floor debate yesterday, there was something in it for everyone.

Conservatives echoed Sen. John McCain's claim that the denial was unprecedented and outrageous. Many liberals frustrated by Lieberman's opposition to health care reform (among a lengthy list of other grievances) enjoyed what they saw as Franken "shutting down" their nemesis. And much of the media went along with the framing, themselves lusting for some political bloodsport.

Problem was, it wasn't true. In fact, it was clear from the exchange itself that it wasn't true. But everyone reacted to an abbreviated version of the exchange.

As the exchange makes clear, when McCain responded to Franken's objection by angrily denouncing the supposedly-unprecedented action, Sen. Carl Levin immediately pointed out that, in fact, an identical denial had occured earlier in the day, and that the purpose was simply to keep debate moving.

Indeed, pretty much everybody involved has made clear it was really no big deal. (Except for McCain, but we'll come back to him.)

Here's Franken:

"I agreed with every word he said for the entire 10 minutes, and I think he probably only had maybe 30 seconds left," he said. "He didn't take it personally at all."

Franken says Majority leader Harry Reid ordered all senators who presided today to keep speeches to their ten minute limits and not grant any extensions.

"Usually you're allowed to do this and, just, today we were told not to let it happen because there's been some attempt to string out the debate," Franken said. "So, I really just had no choice."

And Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's office agreed. Minneapolis Star Tribune correspondent Eric Roper reported on December 17:

A spokesman for Majority Leader Harry Reid said that Franken was merely adhering to a request from Reid to strictly enforce the rules because the Senate is already in session practically 'round the clock.' "

Politico reported on December 18 that Reid spokesman Jim Manley stated of Reid's request, "We did that to maintain order and that no senator had an unfair advantage over another in terms of speaking. ... It was a simple request of the leader and Sen. Franken was adhering to the request of his leadership."

And Lieberman:

Lieberman laughed off the incident as much ado about nothing when he returned to the chamber a couple of hours later. He said that Franken apparently was following procedures for sticking to time limits that had been handed down by Senate leaders. Franken had made a good-natured gesture with his hands, Lieberman said, "as if to say 'There's nothing I can do'."

And indeed, earlier in the day, when Sen. John Cornyn asked for more time for his speech, the presiding officer, Sen. Mark Bevich said virtually the same thing:

"In my capacity as a Senator from Alaska, I object."

But the facts didn't get in the way of the media's -- and the right-wing's -- efforts to paint Franken as a vindictive partisan.

The right-wing reaction was predictable. Blogger Ann Althouse called it a "dick move" and suggested a boycott of Minnesota. Michelle Malkin accused "nutroots hero Al Franken" of "a little snit fit against Lieberman." Red State's James Richardson accused Franken of "breaking from the Senate's long-held standards of collegiality."

But the overwhelming certainty of the Beltway crowd was stunning.

On Hardball Thursday, Chris Matthews was shocked (accessed from Nexis):

I've never seen that...Working on the Hill, following the Hill, I've never seen a senator cut short on a -- you know, a casual request for an extra minute to continue speaking in a Senate that's allowed to speak forever. Let's face it, we understand you can speak forever in the Senate. Does that show how hot things are getting or what?

Remember, the same thing had happened earlier in the day. And that previous occurrence was mentioned by Levin during the Franken/Lieberman/McCain exchange. And yet Matthews kept insisting it was unique, coming back to it again and again. Later in the show, Matthews hosted Joan Walsh and Melinda Henneberger -- and all agreed it was a "direct shot" at Lieberman.

Henneberger insisted (from Nexis):

Franken looked a little rude, and it was no coincidence that he was the first one to have the clock called on him, given that I'm sure Franken wanted to come across the desk and kill him, maybe not so much.

But Lieberman wasn't the "first one to have the clock called on him." As Carl Levin made clear. Where on earth did Henneberger get the idea that he was? She obviously hadn't checked, so why on earth would she feel comfortable making such an assertion?

Over on CNN's Situation Room, senior political analyst David Gergen had an entirely erroneous analysis (from Nexis):

Yes, John McCain is scolding him, scolding Al Franken. I think that Al Franken went beyond the traditions of the Senate. There is normally -- it is a club after all in the eyes of the traditionalists, and this is very personal.

Joe Lieberman said I don't take it personally, but in fact, it was intended to be personal, and I think it reflects the frustration, the anger, the boiling resentments, and a sense among many in the Senate that maybe this thing is going to slip away from them.

Friday morning, the media continued to pile on Franken.

On Morning Joe, Lawrence O'Donnell declared "I've never seen [this] before. I spent a lot of years on the Senate floor. I did not know that the presiding officer could do that. I thought only a member up in the body could object. But it turns out you can." David Gregory went yammering on about Franken trying to "make a mark" and being a "liberal Senator" who dislikes Lieberman and "working the levers of power."

And then this exchange:

SAVANNAH GUTHRIE: If you ask the Franken folks, they say this wasn't a dis. They were trying to enforce the strict time rules because they are trying to jam so much in, trying to get the health care bill to the floor.

JOE SCARBOROUGH: Savannah, if that were the case, why would he say 'As my capacity of Senator from Minnesota'?

LAWRENCE O'DONNELL: I think he didn't want to do it as the presiding officer. ... It's shocking, it's never happened before.

Seriously, that wasn't even the first time it had happened yesterday. And the previous time, when Begich told Cornyn his time was up, he used the exact same wording. Because that's the wording they had been told to use.

Meanwhile, over at Fox & Friends, host Brian Kilmeade called Franken "an angry clown. He's a liberal who's mad at Joe Lieberman" and said Franken "needs to be chastised by Senator Reid. ... He needs somebody in his own party that has power over him to say, 'Al, you're embarrassing us.'" Keep in mind: Franken was acting on direction from Reid!

Kilmeade's co-host Steve Doocy weighed in by calling Franken "uncivil" and "not very polite" -- which, again, is news to Lieberman, who noted that Franken had been good-natured about it.

And Gretchen Carlson suggested Franken was part of a "trend" of "newbie politicians that don't know exactly the protocol," adding, "You have the senior senator John McCain saying I've never seen this happen before, and the freshman senator Al Franken maybe not knowing how the rules are played."

Remember: The "senior senator John McCain" was wrong; it had happened just a few hours earlier. And the "freshman senator Al Franken" was doing exactly what leadership had told all presiding officers to do.

Not only was McCain wrong about what happened yesterday, his comments were entirely hypocritical. As Think Progress' Faiz Shakir notes, McCain himself objected to Sen. Mark Dayton's request for an additional 30 seconds to finish remarks during the 2002 Iraq war debate.

And yet on Friday, McCain was still making the same false and hypocritical claim and the media were airing his comments without checking them out. (While Lou Dobbs and Sean Hannity were still pushing the storyline on their afternoon radio shows.)

The "story" -- if there is one -- of yesterday's exchange should have been that McCain was wrong, and a hypocrite, in his angry denunciation of Franken's objection.

Lazy journalism is bad.

Lazy journalism practiced by D.C. political analysts who insist they know what they're talking about is even worse.

Source: Mediamatters.org

Social Media Consulting, Web Presence,
Call Center Technology
Book A FREE 1/2 Hr. Phone Consultation

The Health Care Reform Bill So Far

2009-12-19T12:28:00.002-05:00

Image by Getty Images via Daylife

There are some great elements of this bill that will take some time to set up, such as the new insurance marketplace -- the Exchange -- that allows people without insurance and small businesses to compare plans and buy insurance at competitive prices. But there are a lot of other benefits for families that will kick in during the first year if we get this passed:

In the first year, we will make it illegal for insurance companies to drop coverage for Americans.
In the first year, more of your money will start going where it belongs: towards your care instead of excessive insurance company profits or TV ads. We will start forcing insurance companies to report the proportion of premium dollars that are not spent on medical care -- including profits. If a company isn't spending enough of its premium dollars providing benefits for families, it will have to issue rebate checks to its customers to make up the difference.
In the first year, all insurance plans will have to begin covering preventive services, helping to shift our health care from just sickness to wellness. If you purchase insurance on your own, you will receive preventive care from your doctor without paying a co-pay.
In the first year, seniors will see major relief in paying for prescription drugs. The gap in coverage with Medicare, the so-called "donut hole," will start to close for good.

This bill will reduce premiums for your family, shifting the balance of power from your insurance company back to you.

Health reform extends coverage to 30,000,000 Americans without adding a dime to the Federal deficit. In fact, it represents the largest reduction to the deficit in well over a decade.

The final bill hasn't taken shape yet. There are several more steps in the process, and the President is committed to making it the best bill possible to provide security for those who have insurance and affordable, quality coverage for those who don't.

It is important to look past the bickering and cable chatter and remember that we are on the verge of providing real benefits to Americans who can't wait any longer.

Thanks, and have a great weekend.

Sincerely,

Nancy-Ann DeParle

Director, White House Office of Health Reform

P.S. Don't miss the video of the President's weekly address. Watch it here: http://www.whitehou se.gov/blog/ 2009/12/18/ weekly-address- patients- bill-rights- and-health- reform

Social Media Consulting, Web Presence,
Call Center Technology
Book A FREE 1/2 Hr. Phone Consultation

GOP: Champions of the hypocrites

2009-12-16T10:54:00.003-05:00

The corporate media's double standard on Nazi analogies: When conservatives are compared to the Third Reich, however obscurely, it's an outrageous slur, but when leaders of the right charge progressives with Hitler-like tendencies, it's unremarkable political rhetoric.

Political Animal's Steve Benen (12/8/09) rounds up some similar examples of criticisms that are outrageous when applied by the left to the right, but no big deal when they go the other way--starting with the manufactured controversy over Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's likening Republican foot-dragging over healthcare reform to conservatives' lack of urgency over women's suffrage and ending slavery:

If we're to believe the faux-outrage, the reference to slavery was the rhetorical element that went too far. But this, apparently, is a new concern--the right has been far more direct in making the same comparison. Harry Reid was talking about key moments in history in which the right was wrong, but Michele Bachmann recently called the Democrats' legislative agenda "nothing more than slavery," and no one said a word. Indeed, conservatives routinely insist that the left is trying "enslave" America, and the political mainstream just shrugs its shoulders in response.

This is not uncommon. In 2005, Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) described the Bush administration's torture policies and system of secret prisons as being reminiscent of "Soviets in their gulags." At the time, the media and Republicans were apoplectic about Durbin's remarks, sparking a week-long frenzy. Several conservatives called on the Senate to censure Durbin, and Karl Rove, at the time a high-ranking White House official, argued that Durbin's quote was evidence that liberals are traitors. Durbin eventually offered a tearful apology.

But notice that just a few days ago, Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), a member of the Senate Republican leadership, called Medicaid a "health care gulag." Rep. John Shadegg (R-Ariz.) recently called Dems' health care reform efforts "Soviet-style gulag health care." Neither reporters nor other members of Congress batted an eye.

Also note, when Rep. Alan Grayson (D-Fla.) said Republicans are promoting lethal healthcare policies, it was a huge national controversy. When Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) said the same thing, no one seemed to care.

Journalists really ought to try putting the next GOP press release on this topic in the circular bin. "He called me a name back" is a complaint that you should have learned not to take seriously by the second grade.

Social Media Consulting, Web Presence,
Call Center Technology
Book A FREE 1/2 Hr. Phone Consultation

10 Companies to Avoid This Holiday Season

2009-12-05T21:35:00.003-05:00

Air America put together a list of companies that you should think twice about before handing them your money. Their research is based on descriptions from The Blue Pages: A Directory of Companies Rated By Their Politics And Practices. This is a super handy little book that tells you about companies' environmental, human rights and labor practices and also which political parties they give money to and how much. There are probably hundreds of '10 worst' (or best) lists you could come up with from the book, but Air America at least got the ball rolling.

Here's a little info on what they found. You can read the whole thing on their website and you should, there's lots more there. Also check out the book. It's handy to take along shopping. Or maybe it will just be an iPhone app soon anyway (or maybe it is?).

1. Children's Place: "It gets its products from places with human rights and labor violations and had to pay $1.5 million in a settlement alleging that they violated the Securities Act.

2. Hanes: "...went the extra step to be cited for 'egregious labor violations.'" Oh, and they have not even an attempt at an anti-discrimination policy for sexual orientation and gender identity.

3. JC Penny: "D- on Green America's scorecard and D+ from the NAACP."

4. Limited Brands (this includes Victoria's Secret and Bath & Body Works): "The now scarily common 'sourced from countries with widespread, well-documented human and labor rights abuses' rears its head here..."

5. IBM: "It's been sued for improperly converting employee pension plans and for exposing them to toxic chemicals." Oh and also for "aiding and abetting South Africa's apartheid regime."

6. Albertsons: The gamut of really bad labor stuff — "Unpaid overtime, punishing employees for opposing discrimination policies ... intimidates workers into refusing unions ..." and the list unfortunately goes on.

7. Chiquita: This is a good summary: "Everything is contaminated."

8. L'Oreal: Still getting it for their lack of policy on animal testing (oh, and using banned chemicals).

9. Target: Bad on the environment, racial discrimination and of course ''sourced from countries with widespread, well-documented human and labor rights abuses.'"

10. Wal-Mart: Obvi!

Sadly, this is just a few of the companies out there that you should avoid. I'm sure we can come up with more, but better yet, what are the 10 companies that deserve our cash?

Social Media Consulting, Web Presence,
Call Center Technology
Book A FREE 1/2 Hr. Phone Consultation

Health Care Debate between Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz and Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart

2009-08-24T20:36:00.000-04:00

What Do People Mean When They Say "I Want My Country Back"

2009-08-23T08:14:00.002-04:00

There is a buzz phrase coming from tea baggers, birthers, deathers and right wing people who are raising a ruckus at Town Halls dealing with President OBama's Health Care Reform. I will now translate what people mean when they say "I want my country back".

"I Want My Country Back" means:

1) All immigrants from Mexico, Latin America, Central American Countries, Asian countries should be deported immediately!

2) Black people can remain athletes and musical entertainers. They cannot be presidents or in any position of political power. Once that they are done playing their professional sports and entertaining us with music and dancing, they must go home to their neighborhoods and not return to all white places until they come to clean, cook, entertain or play sports.

3) Black entertainers can only perform jazz, blues, pop and easy listening R & B, Motown hits and early 70's R&B. Hip Hop will be banned.

4) All none English speaking people should be placed in language assimilation camps until they speak English.

5) All movies, television and Broadway shows should have 99% Caucasian casts and White Christian American themes. Black and of color people should be reserved for token roles that reinforce racial and ethnic stereotypes. Caricatured blacks, Asians and other minorities should be encouraged in all movies, television and Broadway shows.

6) Gay people must go back into their closets or else be sent to assimilation camps to be reprogrammed back into white, Christian, heterosexual society.

7) All Gay, Lesbian and transgender people who have children will have their children placed in new foster homes of proper white, fundamentalist Christian familes. Children of mixed races will be appropriately placed in fundamentalist Christian homes of their none white heritage race.

8) Racial profiling will be made legal and encouraged.

9) Hate crimes laws will be reversed.

10) Gay bashing, non Christian grave and temple desecration and lynching will be made legal and encouraged.

11) Politically correct terms will be made illegal. Offensive Racial and sexual epithets will be encouraged.

12) Anti Semitism will be encouraged and made legal.

13) Abortion will be made illegal except for wealthy women who can discretely arrange them with their private physicians for a "DnC" meaning dusting and cleaning. DnC's will be paid for by top insurance companies. DnC is a code word for abortion rights for privileged white women. Poor women can arrange back alley abortions at their own risks. However if they are discovered they and their abortionists will be sentenced to immediate execution.

14) Racial segregation will become a new law. White children will get better educations in general, especially if they are wealthy. Middleclass white students will receive mediocre educations with no art history, music clubs or classes. Poor whites will receive little education and be sent to work by age 12. Creationism will be the only history and science allowed to be taught in schools.The newest and best books will be available in order of income to white children.

15) Child labor laws will be revered. Poor children will be encouraged to work at their earliest possible age with no legalized work shifts.

16) Women and African Americans will lose voter rights.

17) Women's salaries will be reversed to pre 1973 inequality. Girls will be taught in the virtues of being home makers.

18) Non white members of the Supreme Court and female justices will be fired and replaced by white evangelical Christian male justices.

19) America will then be back to the country that all tea baggers, birthers, deathers, white Christian conservatives and right wingnuts want. These are the people that hate President OBama's election. For such people it simply feels wrong to have a black man in the white house, they cannot wrap their head's around the concept of a black man who is educated.

Even though American once belonged to Native American Indians, the America that most uneducated white Christian Conservatives want back is a White Evangelical Christian America. Can they "have their country back"? Thank God this will be very unlikely as American will continue to evolve as a nation of freedom of speech, religious freedom and a land where human rights will prevail. In 2042 Caucasian people will become a minority, however American will become a nation of multi-cultural and multiracial people.

Educated Americans will continue to fight for the greater humanitarian good of our country. At the end of the day America will continue to grow as a wonderful country based upon inclusion and equality. One day we will look back at these town halls and the disruptive, misinformed people "who want their country back". They are the shameful remnants of an America that was once was unenlightened about racial, religious and gender equality.

Posted by Razoretta

***************************************************************************************
Listen to my news Podcast http://RonMills.us/news
Visit My Social Media Blog http://ronmills.us/
Visit me on twitter http://Twitter.com/RainbowUSA
Visit Me On Face Book http://RonMills.us/facebook
My Biz on Twitter http://Twitter.com/theRbuzz

Research 2000 Poll Obama's Approval rating down 2 points

2009-08-21T17:24:00.003-04:00

Research 2000, Adults MoE 2%, Aug 17, 2009 - Aug 20, 2009 (last week's results in parentheses)

Full Crosstabs

	FAVORABLE	UNFAVORABLE	DON'T KNOW	NET CHANGE
PRESIDENT OBAMA	58 (60)	38 (36)	4 (4)	-4

PELOSI:	34 (36)	57 (56)	9 (8)	-3
REID:	33 (34)	56 (55)	11 (11)	-2
McCONNELL:	17 (16)	65 (66)	18 (18)	2
BOEHNER:	13 (11)	65 (66)	22 (23)	3

CONGRESSIONAL DEMS:	41 (43)	53 (51)	6 (6)	-4
CONGRESSIONAL GOPS:	12 (10)	75 (76)	13 (14)	3

DEMOCRATIC PARTY:	44 (45)	49 (48)	7 (7)	-2
REPUBLICAN PARTY:	18 (17)	72 (74)	10 (9)	3

Listen to my news Podcast http://RonMills.us/news
Visit My Social Media Blog http://ronmills.us/
Visit me on twitter http://Twitter.com/RainbowUSA
Visit Me On Face Book http://RonMills.us/facebook
My Biz on Twitter http://Twitter.com/theRbuzz

7 Ways We Can Fight Back Against the Rising Fascist Threat

2009-08-21T10:17:00.002-04:00

7 Ways We Can Fight Back Against the Rising Fascist Threat

First: The teabaggers must not win this one. Back in elementary school, most of us learned that when a bully learns that intimidation and threats work, he'll will keep doing more of it. In fact, the longer he goes without comeuppance, the bolder and badder he becomes, and the harder it is to make him stop. Every success teaches him something new about how to use terror for maximum effect and tempts him to push the envelope and see what else he can get away with. Do nothing, and he'll soon take over the whole playground.

And it happens like this for bullies in groups, too. Living in a fascist regime is just living in a town dominated by the Mob, a street gang, the KKK, or a corrupt sheriff.

It only takes a small handful of thugs to terrorize people into giving up their civil rights, abandoning democracy and doing what they're told, just so they can keep their jobs, windows and families intact.

The main imperative in life becomes staying off the goons' radar. All the enforcers need to do is make an horrific example out of one or two troublemakers every now and then -- and the resulting fear will keep everybody else quietly in line.

Conservatives have tried to subdue other Americans this way for centuries, so there's nothing new going on here. And this is the way they've always done it: they used race (and yes, the birthers and anti-health care rioters are, at root, all about race) and economic calamity to whip up a posse of terrified, well-armed vigilantes, and then turned them loose on society to "enforce order."

Given their colossal investment in organizing and indoctinating the teabaggers, we'd be stupid to believe that this is all going to go away when Congress returns to Washington in September. Having had a taste of power and publicity, these newly empowered mobs are very likely to stick around town and see what else they can do to keep the muck stirred up.

Our choice now is stark: knock them back while they're still new, small and not yet entrenched; or deal with them later, when they've got some real power to fight back with, and the cost to all of us will be so much higher.

Second: Think nationally, fight locally. The conservatives are running this effort as a national campaign -- but that's not where the real fight is. The terror that fuels fascism is always intensely, intimately local in scale.

Fascist goon squads always recruit from the neighborhood -- they're built on people you know. Since that's where they start, that's where they have to be stopped.

This is why all the best tactics involve community-level action. The high-level fight in Congress and the media is already under way, and the Democratic leadership is fighting it with unusual elan. But anybody who sits this one out because they assume that the folks in D.C. have it all handled for them shouldn't be surprised when they start getting "special treatment" from longtime neighbors, or discover that they can't park their car downtown any more without having it vandalized.

That's just the next baby step up from where we are now; and in some places, it's already started to happen. Winning this means getting out there and defending our community's standards and boundaries now, while they're still there to be defended.

Third: Brush up on our nonviolent resistance -- but leave the heavy lifting and rough enforcement to the cops. It's true that the only way to stop a bully is to stand up to them. But there are ways to stand up to them that don't involve getting down to the eye-for-an-eye level.

Back home, we had a saying: "Never mudwrestle a pig. You will lose, and the pig enjoys it."

If we meet thuggery with thuggery, we will lose, because they're just plain better at it. And make no mistake: they will enjoy it. Right now, the right wing is looking -- hard -- to make the case that they're the innocent victim and the left instigated this whole thing. This quote from religious right organizer Gary Bauer is typical of the genre:

My fear, given the stakes and emotions on both sides, is that union thugs, ACORN activists and left-wing anarchists (who ransacked the streets of Minneapolis and St. Paul during last year's Republican National Convention) will turn violent, and innocent people will get hurt. If that happens, the radical left will bear the responsibility for demonizing free speech.

The Nazis used this kind of victim-blaming to tremendous effect as they built up their party.

We must not -- must not -- give our proto-brownshirts any basis to make the same kind of argument. (Of course, the absence of evidence will only drive them to make up fake victims; but then we get to call them out as whining liars with a big fat persecution complex, which is always a fun way to spend a news cycle or two.)

It's about the moral high ground, people. Any choices we make must be consistent with our own values, or we betray both ourselves and the country.

Standing up for health care reform is important; but before that, the country needs to see us standing up for civil discourse and the right to democratic free speech. Since we're defending the rule of law, our best tactic is to use that law.

You have a right to attend a public meeting and speak your mind in a civil, respectful manner. You do not have a right to be disruptive or deprive other people of their right to be heard. And most jurisdictions have laws about disturbing the peace and creating a public nuisance -- laws, let's not forget, that the Bush regime didn't hesitate to stretch until the elastic gave out against people who merely showed up at meetings with the wrong bumper stickers or T-shirts.

Since we're not Bush goons, we can't go around arresting people who haven't yet broken any laws. But when people -- from either side -- cross that line, it's time for the cops and prosecutors to make the point for us: bullying people in a public meeting (or anywhere else) is illegal and will not be tolerated in this county.

Fourth: We need to make absolutely sure that the media get the story right. The teabaggers would run out of power with the flick of a switch if the media would just turn off their cameras. But the cold reality is that this kind of drama is a real ratings-booster.

It would be like telling lions to lay off that elephant carcass. Left alone, the media (local news in particular) will turn these people into cultural heroes. They couldn't turn their backs on this if the republic depended on it.

Since we can't beat 'em, we'll have to join 'em. The best cure for bad speech is always more speech. This means bringing cameras and documenting everything, getting it up on YouTube, and blogging it.

It also means coordinating rapid-response letterwriting to the local paper and keeping down-home reporters well-fed every single day with some new theme that reinforces the idea of concerned nonpartisan citizens trying to keep control over their democratic discourse in the face of organized thugs. Since the media are watching, let's make sure they see it all.

Fifth: Support legislators who don't show fear. The Democratic Party seems to be playing this just right (so far). The leadership has made it known that these noisy, scary people don't represent the 73 percent of Americans who support health care reform. The GOP is running the risk of being marginalized as not only the Party of No, but the Party of Moonbat Crazy.

If you've never attended a public meeting in your life, August 2009 is the month you need to start. Your congressperson's Web site probably lists a schedule, or at least a number you can call to inquire.

But that's just a first step. Do more. Write. Call. Find out where your local congressional office is, and just drop by when you're in the neighborhood. Tell the staff how you feel -- about health care reform, about the teabaggers, about your legislator's brave stance in the face of this.

If they're showing stress, encourage them to stand firm. A constituent in the office counts for thousands writing e-mails, so an in-person visit is 15 minutes incredibly well spent.

One visit or call is good. More is better. Put it in your schedule to contact your representatives at least once a week for the duration, and make sure they're not buckling under the pressure.

Sixth: Shut down the hate talkers. In most parts of the country, the teabaggers are coming straight out of right-wing talk-radio audiences. For hours every day, they're mainlining raw emotion and toxic misinformation.

They're going put your kids before "death panels!" They're going to kill your granny! You're going to have to call the White House to get a bone set! You'll be a Real American Hero if you get out there and join the "resistance!"

Cutting off this endless torrent of lies, fearmongering and validation will go a long way toward powering down the whole movement. (Conversely, what happens when these kinds of radio instigators are left to spin it all the way out to the end can be summed up in two words: Radio Rwanda.)

The basic recipe: Record their shows. Take notes of anything they say that is intimidating, threatening, or aimed at inciting violence against a named target. And while you're at it, note every single advertiser they have.

Then write a polite letter the CEOs of the sponsoring companies. Throw them some choice quotes from these shows and ask them if this is the kind of thing they want their product associated with. (Point out that if their own employees said things like this at work, they'd be fired on the spot.)

Often, the CEO has no clue that any of this is happening and will pull the ads as soon as she finds out what's being done in her name. This has worked extremely well -- and quickly -- at both the local and national level.

Finally: Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty. Even if we succeed this time, let's not kid ourselves that this is over. The conservatives are investing a lot of money and effort to build a mass movement that is explicitly aimed at destroying a Democratic government -- and if we learned anything from the Clinton years, it's that they're not going to let up for a second as long as the Democrats are in control.

This is our new reality -- and it comes straight out of Hitler's playbook (check out Chapter 6 of Mein Kampf). Their intention is to keep the outrage junkies high by giving them a never-ending supply of new, made-up reasons to act out.

When the birth certificate fracas cools, they're standing by with "death panels." When that one's run its course, there will be something else -- over and over, every few weeks, for as long as the Dems rule.

Which means that even if we win this round, we can't stand down. We're going to be pushing back against these bullies, over and over, for the next three to seven years.

There are only two outcomes here. Either we get very good at spotting and stopping these attempts at a brownshirt takeover the minute they crop up; or they're going to get very good at public intimidation and keep ratcheting it up further toward outright violence and goon rule.

That's how it's going to be for the rest of this administration. The sooner we resign ourselves to the zero-sum nature of this fight, the sooner we can get on with getting good at it.

Posted by: Sara Robinson

Listen to my news Podcast http://RonMills.us/news
Visit My Social Media Blog http://ronmills.us/
Visit me on twitter http://Twitter.com/RainbowUSA
Visit Me On Face Book http://RonMills.us/facebook
My Biz on Twitter http://Twitter.com/theRbuzz

Rahm didn't count on you

2009-08-20T11:03:00.002-04:00

Help us reach 25,000 petition signatures: House progressives need to keep the pledge for a strong public option.

When Congress returns to work on health care next month, Jane Hamsher and nyceve will be there to deliver the petition.

Click here to add your name to our petition.

After two months of your hard work, 65 members House drew a line in the sand: no public option, no health care reform. You responded by raising more than $175,000 for those members in less than 48 hours.

It's a great start, but it's just the beginning. We need to make sure these 65 members hold firm. We've shown them we have their backs. Now they need to get ours.

I'm starting a petition to the House to keep their pledge to support only a public option in both the House bill AND the conference bill.

I'm going to be in DC next month. If we can reach 25,000 signatures, Jane Hamsher and I will be there to hand-deliver the petition to the House when they return to take up health care.

Click here to add your name to our petition to members of Congress who pledged to support only a strong public option.

Members of the House who took this pledge will be under insane pressure from Rahm Emanuel and the rest of the Obama Administration to cave for an insurance industry bailout.

Rahm's plan all along has been to trade away the public option. But Rahm didn't count on you. Now that we've shown progressives in the House it's possible to stick together, it will be our job to make sure these members hold the line on a strong public option.

Let's be clear: these members need to hold the line on two votes. Once when the House passes its own bill, and again on the conference bill that's combined with the Senate's version. Anything less is a vote for an insurance industry bailout.

Help us reach 25,000 signatures on our petition to House progressives. You can make sure that progressives keep the pledge to only vote for a strong public option.

Click here to add your name to our petition: http://action.firedoglake.com/page/s/keepthepledge

Thanks so much for your help. I hope we can get to 25,000 signatures so I can deliver the petition with Jane next month.

Best,

Eve Gittelson (nyceve)

The Blue Dog Coalition

2009-08-14T10:11:00.002-04:00

Contact these members of Congress and urge them to support the public plan option! These are the Democrats holding us back from the best health care plan possible.

Key people to contact - view the entire list of the 56 Blue Dog Democrats here!

Rep. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin (SD), Blue Dog Co-Chair for Administration

Rep. Baron Hill (IN-09), Blue Dog Co-Chair for Policy

Rep. Charlie Melancon (LA-03), Blue Dog Co-Chair for Communications

Rep. Heath Shuler (NC-11), Blue Dog Whip

Rep. Mike Ross (AR-04)

The List of Democratic Senators not directly supporting the public plan health care option

Call and email them, telling them to support President Obama's public plan option!

*********************************************************************

Listen to my news Podcast http://RonMills.us/news
Visit My Social Media Blog http://ronmills.us/
Visit me on twitter http://Twitter.com/RainbowUSA
Visit Me On Face Book http://RonMills.us/facebook
My Biz on Twitter http://Twitter.com/theRbuzz

Changing Hearts & Minds With Social Media

2009-08-06T12:06:00.003-04:00

Changing Hearts & Minds With Social Media

Facebook, Twitter, MySpace, YouTube and other social networking sites allow users to spread information quickly. So how does GLAAD use the Internet to highlight stories and get members involved? GLAAD's Director of Online Media Justin Cole cuts through the jargon and explains how you can get involved by simply pressing a few buttons on your computer.

Follow GLAAD on Twitter
Register for free at the new www.glaad.org to help GLAAD fight defamation
Visit glaadBLOG for daily breaking news

Join GLAAD's groups on Facebook
Official group: http://www.facebook.com/home.php#/group.php?gid=10132006109

Listen to my news Podcast http://RonMills.us/news
Visit My Social Media Blog http://ronmills.us/
Visit me on twitter http://Twitter.com/RainbowUSA
Visit Me On Face Book http://RonMills.us/facebook
My Biz on Twitter http://Twitter.com/theRbuzz

The GOP's Appeal to White Trash Voters

2009-08-04T11:45:00.003-04:00

I mean "Birthers"

The appeal of the anti-Obama agenda has proven to be particularly strong among whites of low and moderate incomes. The Pew Center, tracking evaluations of Obama's job performance, found in a July 30 report that there "has been essentially no shift in opinion among affluent whites [but] among whites with annual family incomes of less than $75,000, Obama's approval ratings have declined substantially (from 57% in June to 47% today). Assessments of Obama's performance remain high among African Americans (85%)."

ABC News polling similarly found in late June that the possible costs to consumers of cap-and-trade legislation "are particularly important to less well-off Americans. Among those making less than $50,000 a year, support for regulating greenhouse gas emissions drops by 17 points (from 75 percent to a still-majority 58 percent) if it raises prices; support if it costs $10 a month is 49 percent; and at $25, just 35 percent."

The trend lines reported by Gallup are perhaps the most striking: At the start of this year, during late January, Gallup found that Obama's job approval ratings stood at 63 percent among whites, 86 percent among African Americans, and 74 percent among Hispanics. In the Gallup survey taken in late July, Obama had gained 9 points among blacks, reaching 95 percent job approval, and was holding his own among Hispanics, dropping a statistically insignificant 2 points to 72 percent.

Among white respondents, however, he had dropped 16 points to 47 percent.

These findings are reinforced by recent trend lines emerging in the Wall Street Journal/NBC polling series.

In that series, the decline has been sharpest among white men, whose approval-disapproval ratio fell by 27 points, from 50-36 to 40-53.

Source: huffingtonpost.com

Listen to my news Podcast http://RonMills.us/news

Visit My Social Media Blog http://ronmills.us/

Visit me on twitter http://Twitter.com/RainbowUSA

Visit Me On Face Book http://RonMills.us/facebook

My Biz on Twitter http://Twitter.com/theRbuzz

GOP Advocates Gerrymandering

2009-08-03T11:06:00.002-04:00

Governors Races are Where the Action Is, GOP Advocates Gerrymandering: "Forget about the lopsided House and the 60-seat Senate; the real races to watch in 2010 could have nothing to do with federal government. This cycle's 39 gubernatorial races are shaping up to be where much of the action is, with as many as half of them potentially switching parties and at least 19 open seats…Throw in the fact that, for the first time in 20 years, the races are being held immediately before the redistricting process, and the environment is shaping up to be nearly unprecedented." Later in the story, GOP operatives say they need to win governorships to take back Congress and the White House. Read more here.

Listen to my news Podcast http://RonMills.us/news
Visit My Social Media Blog http://ronmills.us/
Visit me on twitter http://Twitter.com/RainbowUSA
Visit Me On Face Book http://RonMills.us/facebook
My Biz on Twitter http://Twitter.com/theRbuzz

Hillary Clinton Recognizes Stonewall, Gay and Lesbian Pride Month

2009-06-01T19:20:00.002-04:00

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has released a statement recognizing June as Gay and Lesbian Pride Month.

It reads:

"Forty years ago this month, the gay rights movement began with the Stonewall riots in New York City, as gays and lesbians demanded an end to the persecution they had long endured. Now, after decades of hard work, the fight has grown into a global movement to achieve a world in which all people live free from violence and fear, regardless of their sexual orientation or gender identity.

"In honor of Gay and Lesbian Pride Month and on behalf of the State Department, I extend our appreciation to the global LGBT community for its courage and determination during the past 40 years, and I offer our support for the significant work that still lies ahead.

"At the State Department and throughout the Administration, we are grateful for our lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender employees in Washington and around the world. They and their families make many sacrifices to serve our nation. Their contributions are vital to our efforts to establish stability, prosperity and peace worldwide.

"Human rights are at the heart of those efforts. Gays and lesbians in many parts of the world live under constant threat of arrest, violence, even torture. The persecution of gays and lesbians is a violation of human rights and an affront to human decency, and it must end. As Secretary of State, I will advance a comprehensive human rights agenda that includes the elimination of violence and discrimination against people based on sexual orientation or gender identity.

"Though the road to full equality for LGBT Americans is long, the example set by those fighting for equal rights in the United States gives hope to men and women around the world who yearn for a better future for themselves and their loved ones.

"This June, let us recommit ourselves to achieving a world in which all people can live in safety and freedom, no matter who they are or whom they love."

Time's Klein rips Limbaugh for "on a daily basis ... delivering misinformation, lies to a large audience in America"

2009-05-10T21:22:00.000-04:00

Democratic strategist James Carville explains why he thinks the Democrats will hold power for the next 50 years.

2009-05-09T23:11:00.000-04:00

Budget victory! Here's what's next

2009-05-06T13:06:00.002-04:00

Last week, Congress passed President Obama's budget. It's a budget that works for ordinary Americans, and it's all thanks to people like you.

Members of Organizing for America spoke up and asked Congress to lay a new foundation for American growth by passing a budget that invests in energy, health care, and education -- and that's exactly what they did.

But as the President said on his hundredth day in office, we should be pleased with our progress so far, but not satisfied. There's so much more work to do, and to get it done we need to keep growing this movement.

Please take the next step by writing a letter to the editor of your local paper -- share your story about how you helped pass this budget, and invite folks in your community to join in.

Write and submit your letter online by clicking here.

The 10 Hottest Campaigns

2009-04-30T07:47:00.002-04:00

March for Immigration Reform on May 1st
Posted by http://www.anewdayforimmigration.org/.

This May 1st, thousands of people will take to the streets to support immigrant rights across the country. From Miami to Chicago to Los Angeles (and everywhere in between), folks will be showing their support for President Obama's plan for immigration reform in 2009. Will join the movement and help our country work towards a fair and just immigration policy? Find the rally nearest you here or at http://www.anewdayforimmigration.org/

Taxpayers nationwide are organizing to demand Bank of America reform its ways. Led by SEIU, MoveOn.org, and other community groups, people from all over the U.S. are demanding that Bank of America fire CEO Ken Lewis and change the way they do business. We bailed them out, now they need to listen to us.Will you stand up and demand Bank of America change its way? To learn more click here: http://takebacktheeconomy.org/

Update: BoA has ousted Ken Lewis as chairman, but he is unfortunately still CEO of the company.

Visit My Social Media Blog http://ronmills.us/
Visit me on twitter http://Twitter.com/RainbowUSA
Visit Me On Face Book Profile

Conservatives’ 100 Days Of no NO

2009-04-30T07:07:00.002-04:00

Conservatives are desperate to see President Obama fail. Seems to me to be quite unpatriotic to put their political preferences above the safety, security, and well being of the American people and the nation.

If you like it, click through to YouTube after you watch the whole thing, watch it again, and rate it!

Don't forget to share this with your friends on Facebook (via msgs, walls and your status), Twitter and wherever else you can!

http://budurl.com/bl6c

http://budurl.com/bl6c

Visit My Social Media Blog http://ronmills.us/
Visit me on twitter http://Twitter.com/RainbowUSA
Visit Me On Face Book Profile

Signs G.O.P. Is Rethinking Stance on Gay Marriage

2009-04-28T16:25:00.002-04:00

Signs G.O.P. Is Rethinking Stance on Gay Marriage

Some Republicans say the issue of gay marriage may be turning into more of a hindrance than a help.

Visit My Social Media Blog http://ronmills.us/
Visit me on twitter http://Twitter.com/RainbowUSA
Visit Me On Face Book Profile

A Real Taxpayer Revolt

2009-04-25T12:23:00.002-04:00

On Tuesday, April 28th, taxpayers will stand up against corporate greed, rallying at 100s of Bank of America branches across the nation. Led by SEIU, CCC, Unions, US Action, MoveOn.org, and more, protesters are calling for the firing of CEO Ken Lewis, the end to consumer and predatory lending practices, and a commitment to real financial reform.

Click here to learn how to participate and why Bank of America needs reform.

Visit My Social Media Blog http://ronmills.us/
Visit me on twitter http://Twitter.com/RainbowUSA
Visit Me On Face Book Profile

One Step Closer To Health Care Reform

2009-04-24T13:43:00.002-04:00

It all comes down to this: Because of grassroots pressure, Republicans didn't have the votes to block reconciliation for health care. Republicans are threatening procedural war, but it looks very likely that a minority of Senators will not be able to block health care reform this time. And so the GOP has a choice: They can work with Democrats in good faith (something they have declined to do so far), or they can be ignored as Democrats pass the health reform this country so desperately needs with a simple majority vote in the Senate.

Either way, progressives won a victory last night, and we're one step closer to winning quality, affordable health care for all.

Thanks To Everyone Who Made Phone Calls

Ron Mills

Visit My Social Media Blog http://ronmills.us/
Visit me on twitter http://Twitter.com/RainbowUSA
Visit Me On Face Book Profile

Randi Rhodes to Return to Talk Radio

2009-04-24T06:45:00.002-04:00

San Francisco's Green960 announces 'Goddess of Progressive Talk' to be syndicated by Premiere Radio Networks, home to Limbaugh, Hannity and other rightwing talkers

Updated: Premiere announces return date of May 11, show to broadcast live from D.C....

Following a nearly two-month absence from the airwaves, Progressive radio talker Randi Rhodes is set to return, according to an announcement this afternoon from John Scott of San Francisco's Green960 (KKGN). She will be syndicated by Premiere Radio Networks as reported in a video-taped announcement just posted on the Green960 website.

Premiere is known for their national syndication of far-right talkers such as Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Dr. Laura and Glenn Beck. Rhodes, known by fans as the "Goddess of Progressive Talk", had formerly been with NovaM Radio, which folded when she left, and at Air America Radio prior to that...

Read More..............

Visit My Social Media Blog http://RonMills.us
Visit me on twitter http://Twitter.com/RainbowUSA
Visit Me On Face Book Profile

2010 Senate Ratings

2009-04-22T11:22:00.002-04:00

2010 Senate Ratings

Here are Rothenberg's* (leans Right-Wing) latest Senate ratings.
#- Moved benefiting Democrats
*- Moved benefiting Republicans

Lean Takeover (2 R, 0 D)

Bunning (R-KY) #
Specter (R-PA) #

Toss-Up (3 R, 1 D)

MO Open (Bond, R)
NH Open (Gregg, R)
OH Open (Voinovich, R)
Dodd (D-CT) *

Narrow Advantage for Incumbent Party (2 R, 1 D)

FL Open (Martinez, R) *
Burr (R-NC)
Reid (D-NV)

Clear Advantage for Incumbent Party (1 R, 3 D)

Vitter (R-LA) *
Bennet (D-CO) #
Burris (D-IL) *
Lincoln (D-AR) *

Currently Safe (11 R, 12 D)

Bennett (R-UT)
Coburn (R-OK)
Crapo (R-ID)
DeMint (R-SC)
Grassley (R-IA) *
Isakson (R-GA)
McCain (R-AZ)
Murkowski (R-AK)
Shelby (R-AL)
Thune (R-SD)
KS Open (Brownback, R)
DE Open (Kaufman, D)
Bayh (D-IN)
Boxer (D-CA)
Dorgan (D-ND) #
Feingold (D-WI) #
Gillibrand (D-NY)
Inouye (D-HI)
Leahy (D-VT)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murray (D-WA)
Schumer (D-NY)
Wyden (D-OR)

Visit My Social Media Blog http://RonMills.us
Visit me on twitter http://Twitter.com/RainbowUSA
Visit Me On Face Book Profile

Rep. Jane Harman- Neo Con Traitor & Spy or just misunderstood?

2009-04-21T15:35:00.002-04:00

For over 4 1/2 years I have been writing about Rep. Jane Harman (D-CA).

Commenting on her being at the very least a Neo-Con Bush Cheney insurgent at the very worst a traitor and a spy. Every time I posted about Rep. Harman I received the most hateful emails, ranging from being a bad democrat to being ant-Semitic and even anti woman because, I suggested Nancy Pelosi, not appoint her as chair of the Intelligence Committee because she was a war lovin Neo-Con. If Rep. Harman is the terrorist and spy I think she is, she should go to prison.
I wrote this on Nov 28, 2006 6:22 pm

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/fight-the-right/message/20310

Rep. Jane Harman (D-CA).

in her own words

On Colin Powell's U.N. speech: "I happen to know that our intelligence agencies made absolutely certain that it was totally accurate, and that anything put out there had been reviewed 100 times to make sure it was accurate." (Fox News, Big Story with John Gibson, 2/6/03)

On Saddam Hussein's WMDs: "There's a strong intelligence case that Iraq has not destroyed its weapons of mass destruction and is building the capability to use them." (Washington Post, 1/30/03)

On the Iraq-al Qaeda connection: "There's a growing al Qaeda presence in Iraq, and I think the case can be made that there is a growing affiliation [between the two.]" (Washington Post, 1/30/03)

On victory in Iraq: "[V]ictory will mean displaying for the world the evidence of weapons of mass destruction, and the horrors and torture of a generation of abuse by this dictator and then rebuilding the country with a multi-national coalition, and the emergence of an indigenous, transparent, moderate, democratic regime in Iraq run by the people of Iraq for them. I think that that will be a marvelous victory." (CNN, Larry King Live, 3/19/03)

On the NSA domestic surveillance program: "I believe the program is essential to US national security and that disclosure has damaged critical intelligence capabilities. . . . Due to its sensitive nature, I have been barred from discussing any aspect of this program. . . .[However] I am deeply concerned by reports that this program in fact goes far beyond the measures to target Al Qaeda[.]" (Harman press release, 12/21/05)

On the leak to the New York Times which revealed the program's questionable operations: "I deplore that leak. . . I think it is tragic that a lot of our capability is now across the pages of the newspapers." (NBC, Meet the Press, 2/12/06)

Top Democrat tried to kill NSA wiretapping story in 2004

http://rawstory.com/08/blog/2009/04/21/times-confirms-democrat-tried-to-stop-wiretapping-story-possibly-before-2004-election/

The New York Times confirmed late Monday that a top Democratic congresswoman called the paper in 2004 and tried to keep it from publishing an article exposing the Bush Administration's warrantless wiretapping program — possibly helping to sway the balance in the 2004 presidential election.

The New York Times exposed the warrantless wiretapping program in 2005, revealing that the National Security Agency had engaged in the interception of thousands of American and foreign calls without a warrant as part of a program intended to disrupt terrorist plots. Upon running the story, they also admitted that they had withheld the article for a year at the urging of Bush Administration officials.

But buried in a Times article published Tuesday is the revelation that the top Democratic congresswoman on the House Intelligence Committee, Jane Harman (D-CA), called the paper's Washington, D.C. editor in "October or November" of 2004 in an effort to quash the story.

"Bill Keller, the executive editor of The Times, said in a statement Monday that Ms. Harman called Philip Taubman, then the Washington bureau chief of The Times, in October or November of 2004," the Times writes. "Mr. Keller said she spoke to Mr. Taubman — apparently at the request of Gen. Michael V. Hayden, then the N.S.A. director — and urged that The Times not publish the article."

"She did not speak to me," Keller said in a statement, "and I don't remember her being a significant factor in my decision."

In addition, "Shortly before the article was published more than a year later, in December 2005, Mr. Taubman met with a group of Congressional leaders familiar with the eavesdropping program, including Ms. Harman. They all argued that The Times should not publish," they Times reporters added.

At the time of her calls in 2004, Harman was part of the Gang of 8 — one of eight powerful members of Congress who are briefed on heavily classified intelligence matters. She was the most senior Democrat in the House dealing with intelligence affairs, and was sidelined after the 2006 congressional elections.

"October or November" 2004 would have been the month before, or the month of, respectively, of the election that Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) lost to then-incumbent President George W. Bush.

The paper did not give the exact date of Harman's call.

Harman's role in the wiretapping scandal emerged after a story Sunday in Congressional Quarterly, which disclosed that the California Democrat had been caught on an NSA wiretap promising an Israeli agent that she'd lobby to get the charges for two Israeli lobbyists accused of espionage reduced. The Times expanded on the story today.

An "official with access to the transcripts said someone seeking help for the employees of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, a prominent pro-Israel lobbying group, was recorded asking Ms. Harman, a longtime supporter of its efforts, to intervene with the Justice Department," the paper wrote. "She responded, the official recounted, by saying she would have more influence with a White House official she did not identify.

"In return, the caller promised her that a wealthy California donor — the media mogul Haim Saban — would threaten to withhold campaign contributions to Representative Nancy Pelosi, the California Democrat who was expected to become House speaker after the 2006 election, if she did not select Ms. Harman for the intelligence post," the paper added.

The full Times story is available here.

-John Byrne

Visit My Social Media Blog http://RonMills.us
Visit me on twitter http://Twitter.com/RainbowUSA
Visit Me On Face Book Profile

Phoney Broward Tea Bag Protests

2009-04-10T14:57:00.002-04:00

Despite these attempts to make the "movement" appear organic, the principle organizers of the local events are actually the lobbyist-run think tanks Americans for Prosperity and Freedom Works. The two groups are heavily staffed and well funded, and are providing all the logistical and public relations work necessary for planning coast-to-coast protests:

– Freedom Works staffers coordinate conference calls among protesters, contacting conservative activists to give them "sign ideas, sample press releases, and a map of events around the country."

– Freedom Works staffers apparently moved to "take over" the planning of local events in Florida.

– Freedom Works provides how-to guides for delivering a "clear message" to the public and media.

To read about the phoney Broward Tea bagging go to: http://budurl.com/rcwl

Ron Mills Blog Closing Down

2009-04-03T19:32:00.005-04:00

This will be the last Political & current event post.
On Monday April 13th 2009 this blog will be converting to
Ron Mills JavaTime Radio

We will be discussing New Social Media in Business Political Campaigns & Issues

Monday- Friday 9am- 10am EST

Join Us at http://RonMills.us/javatime

Message From Howard Dean

2009-04-02T13:07:00.002-04:00

I have an announcement. After four exciting years in Washington, I'm hitting the campaign trail again! Only this time, I'm campaigning to help President Obama win health care for all.

During the election, President Obama proposed a health care plan that would give every American the freedom to choose between keeping their private insurance—if they have any—and choosing a universally available public health insurance option like Medicare.

But for-profit insurance companies and HMOs are already working hard to strip this public health insurance option from any upcoming health care bill. They don't want us to have a choice, and they'll stop at nothing to kill real reform. Trouble is, some in Congress are siding with the insurance companies—and against what's best for the rest of us.

Today, we draw a line in the sand. A public health insurance option is the only way to guarantee health care for all Americans. And to show that we mean business, we all need to tell Congress we won't settle for less.

If 250,000 of you sign this petition, I will personally deliver it to Congress. Clicking here will add your name:

http://pol.moveon.org/standwithdrdean/o.pl?id=15863-2954536-Ot11cKx&t=1

Here's our message to Congress: "Give America a choice. We support health care reform that allows individual Americans to choose either a universally available public health care option like Medicare or for-profit private insurance. A public option is the only way to guarantee health care for all Americans and its inclusion is non-negotiable. Any legislation without the choice of a public option is only insurance reform and not the health care reform America needs."

The fight is heating up over whether or not to include the public health insurance option. This is going to be the biggest fight in the debate over health care reform. It would take the power away from the private insurance companies that have driven up costs and denied coverage for years—and they're dead set against it.

But I've seen firsthand what people power can accomplish. And I know I can count on MoveOn members to help lead the charge.

Now is our moment to stand up. Together, we can generate broad-based support for a public health insurance option. We will need to canvass our neighborhoods, call our elected leaders, and arrange meetings with members of Congress in the coming months.

Our goal today is to show Congress that we are many and ready to fight. Can you click here to stand with me?

http://pol.moveon.org/standwithdrdean/o.pl?id=15863-2954536-Ot11cKx&t=2

After you add your name, spread the word to your friends, family, and co-workers. Send a personal email and include a link to the website, update your Facebook status to tell people about the campaign, write a blog post about why you support this campaign—we need all hands on deck to win this fight.

Thank you for all you do.

Gov. Howard Dean, M.D.

PAID FOR BY MOVEON.ORG POLITICAL ACTION, http://pol.moveon.org/. Not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee.

Ed Schultz gets MSNBC gig

2009-04-02T07:37:00.002-04:00

New show to complement Olbermann, Maddow

Talkradio host Ed Schultz has landed his own show on MSNBC, after much speculation that the cabler was looking for another liberal voice to complement its combination of Keith Olbermann and Rachel Maddow.

"The Ed Show" will debut Monday in the 6 p.m. ET hour currently occupied by "1600 Pennsylvania Avenue." The host of the latter show, David Shuster, will host a two-hour afternoon show at 3 p.m. ET along with Tamron Hall. Norah O'Donnell, who currently hosts that hour, will move to a morning time period which has yet to be announced.

Buoyed by the traction the network has received from "Countdown With Keith Olbermann" and "The Rachel Maddow Show," MSNBC was said to be looking for a host to follow their shows in primetime at 10 p.m. ET. But MSNBC president Phil Griffin has said that a repeat of Olbermann's show in that time period does well for the network, making them more reluctant to alter the lineup. For the first time ever in March, the network edged out CNN in the primetime hours from 8 to 11 p.m., although Fox News Channel continued to hold a wide lead over both networks.

An unabashed liberal who touts his rural, middle-America credentials, Schultz hosts the syndicated radio program "The Ed Schultz Show," aired on 100 stations across the country. He has appeared on MSNBC numerous times, and recently filled in for Shuster on "1600." But some of his greatest exposure came at President Obama's first press conference in February, when he was conspicuously seated in the front row along with Washington journalists.

"He's already made his mark in radio and I'm excited to see what he'll do with the 6 p.m. hour," Griffin said in a statement.

Soure: variety.com

GOP smack down

2009-04-01T08:40:00.002-04:00

Here's part of a statement from DNC chair Tim Kaine congratulating Murphy:

Scott Murphy embraced President Obama's message of change and his plans to fix our economy and create jobs, and as a result he stormed from more than 20 points down to winning a majority of votes cast tonight. Scott's performance tonight in an overwhelmingly Republican district, where Republicans enjoy a registration advantage over Democrats of more than 70,000, represents a repudiation of the failed politics and policies that Republicans continue to embrace. We are confident that when all the ballots are counted, Scott will expand his lead and become an ally to President Obama in Congress who will help the President create jobs and turn our economy around.

And this, from Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), who chairs the DCCC:

From 21 points down to securing a majority of the vote tonight, congratulations to Scott Murphy who ran an extraordinary campaign focused on his record as a successful businessman who helped to create jobs and his strong support for President Obama's economic recovery act. As votes continue to be counted, we're confident that Scott Murphy will expand his lead.

Scott Murphy's strong showing in this district where Republicans outnumber Democrats by more than 70,000 represents a rejection of the obstructionist agenda and scare tactics that have become the hallmark of House Republicans.

The Party Of Zero

2009-03-31T07:54:00.002-04:00

THE GLOSSY PAMPHLET: Last week, reporters excitedly gathered for a GOP press conference where House leaders said they would announce their alternative to Obama's budget. The proposal that GOP leaders presented, however, was a huge disappointment; basically, it was nothing more than a "brochure." Annoyed at being summoned for this non-event, reporters quizzed Boehner on specifics of the plan: "Are you going to have any further details on this today?" "What about some numbers? What about the out-year deficit? What about balancing the budget?" Reporting on MSNBC, host Contessa Brewer exclaimed, "Give me some substance!" The GOP "budget," in fact, contains almost no numbers -- except where they criticize the Obama administration's figures. The few ideas their plan does have include undoing the economic recovery package (which would be hard to do since some of the money is already out the door), and lowering the 35 percent, 33 percent, and 28 percent income tax brackets to 25 percent (regressive cuts that would gut government revenue). According to a Citizens for Tax Justice analysis, more than a quarter of all taxpayers -- mostly low-income families -- would pay more in taxes under this plan than they would under Obama's. On the other hand, "the richest one percent of taxpayers would pay $100,000 less, on average, under the House GOP plan." Additionally, although Republicans claim to be so concerned about the rising deficit, their income tax proposals "would cost over $300 billion more than the Obama income tax cuts in 2011 alone." "The party of 'no' has become the party of no new ideas," quipped White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs in response to the GOP proposal.

TAX WINDFALL FOR CORPORATE EXECUTIVES: According to the Republican leadership, the reason that lawmakers didn't release numbers last week is because they intend to do so this week. "The numbers will come next week with a multi-hundred page piece of legislation" that Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) is currently drafting, Boehner's office told First Read. Ryan's bill will still likely be short on new, deficit-cutting ideas though. As the Wonk Room's Pat Garofalo has noted, his plan "consists almost entirely of massive tax cuts for corporations and the rich," including lowering the top marginal tax rate to 25 percent, lowering the corporate tax rate to 25 percent, and completely eliminating the capital gains tax. Not only are these tax cuts regressive, but they will result in significant lost government revenue. According to a Center for American Progress Action Fund analysis, Ryan's plan gives the average CEO a $1.5 million tax break, while doing nothing for minimum wage workers.

THE RECONCILIATION HYPOCRISY: Republicans are also standing firm against allowing Obama to use the reconciliation process to pass key parts of his budget, such as health care and energy reform. This 25-year-old procedure "allows for the passage of a budget by a simple majority vote rather than the usual 60 votes needed to prevent a filibuster." Republican senators have said that they are prepared to go "nuclear" -- essentially shutting down the Senate through the use of parliamentary maneuvers -- if budget reconciliation is pursued. Sen. Judd Gregg (R-NH) compared reconciliation to "an act of violence" against the GOP. However, Republicans employed the same procedure to pass major Bush agenda items, including the 2001 and 2003 Bush tax cuts, the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005, and the Tax Increase Prevention and Reconciliation Act of 2005. In fact, in 2005, Gregg defended using the reconciliation procedure, arguing, "The president asked for it, and we're trying to do what the president asked for."

954-394-4980

New Show

2009-03-30T12:02:00.002-04:00

It will stream live on ABCNews.com's home page, and on the Politics page -- or if you want a direct link to the Webcast, it's HERE.

The idea behind it: In the same way The Note is political breakfast, we hope to fill you in on what you need to know to make smart conversation over a political lunch.

Twitter Goes Mainstream Media; Does That Signal Its Demise?

2009-03-19T12:13:00.002-04:00

Twitter has finally hit the mainstream media. Quite honestly, it has gotten so much press lately you would think this social networking site only just emerged on the scene. Yet it's been around for a few years now, so can we really call it "Twittermania" simply because the mainstream press has finally taken notice? The great thing about being an early adopter is being able to feel like you are in this secret, underground society where you know something most people don't. You know the advantages and disadvantages of being a part of this exclusive group, and you even try to lure people over little by little simply because you understand the value. But you also know that once enough people are on board, it's growth is like a high speed train careening out of control...until it hits a brick wall. Will Twitter become the next MySpace hitting the height of popularity only to then meet a turning point allowing a competitor to emerge and steal the spotlight? Or has the exposure Twitter is now receiving THAT turning point which determines how we will evolve the way we interact and communicate in the future?

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

I make the comparison to MySpace because for some time MySpace, as we know, was insanely popular. It still is, but that popularity is being userped by it's once underdog competitor, Facebook. At some point MySpace had expansive growth even despite tons of bad press due to spammers and being known as the hot spot for child predators. MySpace had a difficult time getting a handle on this and while they focused on changing it, it gave Facebook the opportunity to step in...again as a place that was a one-time "secret" of the early adopters. MySpace's continuous press coverage flooded the site with new users yet at the same time plateauing its popularity. So I have to wonder if something we all have pushed so hard for, the mass adoption of Twitter, will really be the turning point for its demise.

Whether it is or it isn't, this really could signify something much bigger. Twitter going mainstream WILL change the way society communicates. It will change the way businesses interact with its customers. It will change the way we all network as a whole. So while Twitter's popularity may come and go, I think it's rise to stardom will push the evolution of communications and human interaction as we know it--starting now.

What do you think?

Follow Me @RainbowUSA

posted @ http://www.piercemattie.com/

Obama for America A New Foundation for Growth — Call Your Representatives

2009-03-18T08:46:00.002-04:00

Veterans of the BarackObama.com will surely recognize the big red button at the bottom of this post: Make Calls. This time however, we're not asking you to call voters -- we're asking you to call your representatives in Congress. We need you to let them know that you support the commitment that President Obama made to health care, education and renewable energy in his recent budget outline, and we need you to ask them to support the President's plan as well.

Here's a sample script that you can use for your calls:

Hello, my name is __________ and I'm calling you from __________ (city or town).

I'm calling today because we are in the grips of the worst economic crisis in generations — and President Obama needs the support of every member of Congress to create jobs, fix our economy and rebuild and renew America.

The President has proposed a budget that is honest, responsible and invests in the priorities we need to get our economy moving again and create jobs now and in the future, including:
Renewable energy to reduce our dependence on foreign sources of oil
Making Health Care more affordable for every American by cutting costs
Improving education so our children are prepared for the jobs of the 21st Century
Can I count on Rep./Sen. _________ to support the President's plan?

Once you've finished, be sure to record the results of your calls. And feel free to also let everyone know how your calls went in the comments below. . .

Send others to http://Area-nine.org

954-394-4980

Beginning today, the White House will harness every part of the Democratic Party’s machinery

2009-03-15T11:18:00.003-04:00

Beginning today, the White House will harness every part of the Democratic Party's machinery to defend President Obama's budget and portray Republicans as reflexively political, according to party strategists.

A participant in the planning meetings described the push as a successor to Democrats' message that Rush Limbaugh is the Republican Party leader. "We have exhausted the use of Rush as an attention-getter," the official said.

David Plouffe, manager of Obama's presidential race, helped design the strategy, which includes the most extensive activation since November of the campaign's grassroots network. The database—which includes information for at least 10 million donors, supporters and volunteers—will now be used as a unique tool for governing, with former canvassers now being enlisted to mobilize support for the president's legislative agenda.

Others involved in the planning included White House senior adviser David Axelrod; the DNC chairman, Virginia Gov. Tim Kaine; and DNC Executive Director Jennifer O'Malley Dillon.

The plan follows the private complaints of some Democrats that Obama let the GOP get the better of him during the debate over pork in the budget bill he just signed, and growing concerns among some Democrats that charges of big spending could stick to the president.

Starting this week, President Obama will be "engaging directly with Congress more, and speaking more forcefully on behalf of his budget," a top adviser said.

On Sunday morning, three top White House officials will appear on network interview shows to describe brighter days ahead for the nation's economy, and make the case that the budget is an important part of the president's overall recovery plan.

And officials throughout the party plan to hammer the idea that Republicans are just saying "no" to the president's budget plans without offering their own alternative.

House Republicans, who released an alternative to the stimulus bill, say they'll issue their own budget proposal in the next few weeks. House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) said in January in his opening remarks to this legislative session: "During the 111th Congress, Republicans will strive not to be the party of 'opposition,' but the party of better solutions."

The Obama grassroots network—now known as Organizing for America, a project of the Democratic National Committee—has launched an e-mail pledge drive on MyBarackObama.com in which supporters sign their e-mail address to the statement: "I support President Obama's bold approach for renewing America's economy."

The pledge drive was announced with a video called "Ready for the Fight." Plouffe e-mailed supporters over the weekend with a challenge labeled "The next few weeks": "In the next few weeks we'll be asking you to do some of the same things we asked of you during the campaign—talking directly to people in your communities about the President's ideas for long-term prosperity."

This is not an easy message war for Democrats. Obama's budget calls for the largest deficit in U.S. history and a doubling of the national debt to $23 trillion in 2019. That is a big, juicy target for the GOP, which plans to hit this theme relentlessly all spring.

Republicans were successful in making earmarks, which accounted for only a sliver of total spending, the centerpiece of debate over the omnibus spending bill. The GOP sees sky-high deficits as similarly easy to explain to the public.

So the Democratic allies—the administration, congressional leaders, outside groups and the DNC—are uniting for the new push.

Jim Cramer v Jon Stewart

2009-03-13T11:04:00.002-04:00

Listen: Jim Cramer v Jon Stewart

No one knew exactly what to expect when CNBC host Jim Cramer appeared on The Daily Show last night--except that it wouldn't be pretty--but Cramer's fumbling answers made it less brawl, more mercy killing.

Jon Stewart V. Jim Cramer

2009-03-11T10:02:00.002-04:00

Stay tuned for Thursday night, when Cramer is set to appear on "The Daily Show."

Watch the whole epic smackdown below.

The Daily Show With Jon StewartM - Th 11p / 10c

Basic Cable Personality Clash Skirmish '09

Daily Show Full Episodes
Important Things With Demetri Martin

Political Humor
Economic Crisis

Fundamentalist castigates Republicans for being a fifth column

2009-03-09T11:00:00.002-04:00

This video is from CNN's D.L Hughley Breaks the News, broadcast Mar. 8, 2009.

Download video via RawReplay.com

New PAC to Keep Politicians Accountable

2009-02-27T09:04:00.002-05:00

Progressive bloggers have banded with the union SEIU to form a political action committee that will pressure Democrats to actually be ... liberal, reports the New York Times.

Accountability Now, set to officially launch today (though it has been in the works, at various levels, for some time), is working with state bloggers to recruit and cultivate progressive candidates on the state level.

The name pithily sums it up: the organization will work to make politicians accountable to their constituents rather than the corporate interests so firmly entrenched in Washington. By cultivating new candidates, the organization threatens the taken-for-granted incumbency enjoyed by many in Congress (e.g. the Ned Lamont strategy).

The coalition includes MoveOn, the Service Employees International Union, DailyKos, ColorOfChange.org, Democracy for America, 21st Century Democrats and BlogPAC. Glenn Greenwald at Salon and Jane Hamsher at Firedoglake are also involved.

Greenwald wrote in a July 14, 2008, post in Salon:

Conveying to Democrats that you will support all of them no matter what they do, no matter how egregiously they trample on your values, only ensures that they will ignore your political priorities and values even more. ... Only by attaching a serious price to their enabling of these extremist, destructive policies will their behavior change.
If they are rewarded with greater control and greater comfort for doing what they've been doing, then it's just guaranteed that they'll continue to do the same thing. Only if they suffer losses and have their power threatened from this behavior will the behavior change.

From the Accountability Now PAC Web site:

Accountability Now is an organization built around a single guiding principle: Challenging the institutional power structures that make it so easy, so consequence-free for Congress to open up the government coffers for looting by corporate America while people across the country are losing their jobs and their basic constitutional rights while unable to afford basic health care.
Washington, D.C., is a town that operates on one principle -- maintaining incumbency. There is no higher orthodoxy in D.C.: Thou shalt not challenge an incumbent.

Accountability Now believes that members of Congress in both parties need to hear from their constituents and that nothing focuses the mind of a politician on listening to citizens better than a primary.
Accountability Now will target members of Congress who sell out the interests of their constituents in favor of corporations.

By recruiting progressive candidates who are tapped into the needs and interests of their constituents, the organization hopes to give [Barack] Obama more of an opportunity to stay true to his campaign promises:

Accountability Now will help create the political space needed to enable President Obama to make good on the many progressive policies he campaigned on -- such as getting out of Iraq, ensuring access to affordable health care for every man, woman and child, restoring our constitutional liberties and ending torture.

954-394-4980

GOP Party Of Obstructionist

2009-02-16T09:22:00.002-05:00

Republicans will be judged by the voters. If they want to obstruct and filibuster while the economy is in free fall, the president should call their bluff and let them go at it. In the first four years after F.D.R. took over from Hoover, the already decimated ranks of Republicans in Congress fell from 36 to 16 in the Senate and from 117 to 88 in the House. The G.O.P. is so insistent that the New Deal was a mirage it may well have convinced itself that its own sorry record back then didn't happen either.

The Religious Right's New Demand: Stop Calling Us the Religious Right

2009-02-14T11:45:00.002-05:00

It seems that leaders of the Religious Right are tired of being associated with the Religious Right because nobody likes the Religious Right. Unfortunately for them, they are the Religious Right and that is what we are going to keep calling them, especially now that they are saying we should stop calling them that.

Read More >

The Right's Agenda Under Obama

Yesterday we received a fund-raising letter from the Family Research Council in which FRC President Tony Perkins warned that the Democratic leaders in the White House and Congress are "the most radically liberal in the history of our country" but that FRC will be at "maximum strength" to fight back an "seize the opportunities God has given us."

Perkins crows that FRC has already "scared away the Left from their plan for an all-out blitz to pass their entire wish list of nightmarish legislation in the first 100 days" but ominously warns that "[President] Obama and the Left are [still] insidiously planning to destroy your values and freedoms piece by piece under the radar."

"If our side shows any softness," he warns, Democrats will ram through bills that will destroy everything they hold dear and, as such, it is vitally important that people not only send donations but also fill out the enclosed "Values Voter National Survey on Faith, Family, Freedom, and Other Major National Issues in America."

Read More >

Conservatives are Beating Us...

2009-02-05T17:20:00.002-05:00

Dear Progressive Voter:

Conservatives are Beating Us...

For every 100 phone calls to Congress from conservatives trying to obstruct change, there is only 1 phone call from a progressive demanding passage of President Obama's economic recovery bill. We won't get change unless your Senators hear from you NOW! Call 1-866-544-7573 and demand economic recovery NOW!

100 to 1. We've gotten word from our progressive friends on Capitol Hill that for every one hundred phone calls to Congress from conservatives trying to obstruct change, there is only one phone call from a citizen demanding passage of President Obama's economic recovery bill.

Backed by this conservative grassroots pressure, Senate Republicans are moving rapidly as a block to obstruct - pushing reforms that are designed essentially to make the plan fail. They're demanding that billions be cut from a plan that, if anything, is already too small, and that more be diverted to top-end tax cuts.

That's not how you create jobs or counter a recession.

We can't allow this partisan posturing in the midst of a national crisis. Progressives need to pick up the phone now to counter the onslaught of calls pouring into the Senate from conservatives.

Call 1-866-544-7573 and tell your Senators: Pass the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act NOW!

Consider what conservatives might succeed in passing if they continue to out-call us 100 to 1:

Giving corporations a 30% tax cut, instead of investing in clean green energy that will put people to work.
$3.1 trillion in tax cuts for the wealthy that we know simply don't work to create jobs.
Less help for states that will be forced to lay off workers, instead of funds to retain police and teachers.

This is not the change America is demanding. It's the same failed Bush policies that drove us to economic disaster. It's time to get to work. This is the first big battle of the Obama administration, and we've got to reignite the fight for change.

Call 1-866-544-7573 and tell your Senators: Resist right-wing pressure and pass an economic recovery bill that puts ordinary Americans first.

Most Americans support a big and bold bill that creates jobs, generates clean energy, modernizes infrastructure, makes education and health care more affordable and protects state governments from slashing services.

But that message is getting drowned out in Washington as conservatives out-organize us and bury Congress in calls. We need to respond!

Call 1-866-544-7573 and tell your Senators: Pass a big and bold economic recovery bill that puts America back to work.

On the night Barack Obama was elected President, he said, "This victory alone is not the change we seek. It is only the chance for us to make that change. And that cannot happen if we go back to the way things were. It cannot happen without you."

And it cannot happen if we let conservatives out maneuver us on this pivotal first fight 100 to 1. If we want to turn change from a slogan to reality, we must speak up. Now.

Sincerely,

Robert L. Borosage, Co-Director

954-394-4980

The Republican Death Spiral, in Graphic Form

2009-02-02T23:53:00.002-05:00

From: FiveThirtyEight.com

To add a little bit of rigor to the point I made this morning, take a look at the following:

This is a diagram of the partisan composition of the 109th and 111th Congresses. The 435 Congressional Districts are arranged from left (most Democratic) to right (most Republican) based on their PVI -- that is, partisan voting patterns in the 2000 and 2004 Presidential Elections.

We see that most of the damage to the Republican Party has come in moderate districts. Not a big surprise really, but -- the numbers are fairly jarring. There are 81 districts with a PVI of between D+3 and R+3: these are your prototypical swing districts. After the 2004 elections, Republicans controlled 54 of these 81 seats and Democrats 27. Following November's elections, however, the ratio had almost exactly reversed itself: 55 Democrats and 26 Republicans.

There's More...

954-394-4980

A New Day

2009-01-20T11:09:00.002-05:00

A NEW DAY- http://tinyurl.com/anewday-1-20-09.

954-394-4980

Who Helped Make Bush The Worst President Ever

2009-01-18T07:35:00.002-05:00

1. Dick Cheney — The worst Dick since Nixon. The man who shot his friend while in office. The "most powerful and controversial vice president." Until he got the job, people used to actually think it was a bad thing that the vice presidency has historically been a do-nothing position. Asked by PBS's Jim Lehrer about why people hate him, Cheney rejected the premise, saying, "I don't buy that." His top placement in our survey says otherwise.

2. Karl Rove — There wasn't a scandal in the Bush administration that Rove didn't have his fingerprints all over — see Plame, Iraq war deception, Gov. Don Siegelman, U.S. Attorney firings, missing e-mails, and more. As senior political adviser and later as deputy chief of staff, "The Architect" was responsible for politicizing nearly every agency of the federal government.

3. Alberto Gonzales — Fundamentally dishonest and woefully incompetent, Gonzales was involved in a series of scandals, first as White House counsel and then as Attorney General. Some of the most notable: pressuring a "feeble" and "barely articulate" Attorney General Ashcroft at his hospital bedside to sign off on Bush's illegal wiretapping program; approving waterboarding and other torture techniques to be used against detainees; and leading the firing of U.S. Attorneys deemed not sufficiently loyal to Bush.

4. Donald Rumsfeld — After winning praise for leading the U.S. effort in ousting the Taliban from Afghanistan in 2001, the former Defense Secretary strongly advocated for the invasion of Iraq and then grossly misjudged and mishandled its aftermath. Rumsfeld is also responsible for authorizing the use of torture against terror detainees in U.S. custody; according to a bipartisan Senate report, Rumsfeld "conveyed the message that physical pressures and degradation were appropriate treatment for detainees."

5. Michael Brown — This former commissioner of the International Arabian Horse Association was appointed by Bush to head FEMA in 2003. After Katrina made landfall as a Category 4 hurricane, Brownie promptly did a "heck of a job" bungling the government's relief efforts, and was sent back to Washington a few days later. He was forced to resign shortly thereafter.

6. Paul Wolfowitz — As Deputy Secretary of Defense from 2001 to 2005, Wolfowitz was one of the primary architects of the Iraq war, arguing for the invasion as early as Sept. 15, 2001. Testifying before Congress in February 2003, Wolfowitz said that it was "hard to conceive that it would take more forces to provide stability in post-Saddam Iraq than it would take to conduct the war itself." Wolfowitz eventually admitted that "for bureaucratic reasons, we settled on one issue, weapons of mass destruction," as a justification for war, "because it was the one reason everyone [in the administration] could agree on."

7. David Addington — "Cheney's Cheney" was the "most powerful man you've never heard of." As the leader of Bush's legal team and Cheney's chief of staff, Addington was the biggest proponent of some of Bush's most notorious legal abuses, such as torture and warrantless surveillance, and is a loyal follower of the so-called unitary executive theory.

8. Stephen Johnson — The "Alberto Gonzales of the environment," EPA Administrator Johnson subverted the agency's mission at the behest of the White House and corporate interests, suppressing staff recommendations on pesticides, mercury, lead paint, smog, and global warming.

9. Douglas Feith — Undersecretary of Defense for Policy from 2001-2005, Feith headed up the notorious Office of Special Plans, an in-house Pentagon intelligence shop devised by Rumsfeld and Paul Wolfowitz to produce intelligence to justify the invasion of Iraq. A subsequent investigation by the Pentagon's Inspector General found the OSP's work produced "conclusions that were not fully supported by the available intelligence."

10. John Bolton — As Undersecretary of State, Bolton offered a strong voice in favor of invading Iraq and pushed for the U.S. to disengage from the International Criminal Court and key international arms control agreements. A recess appointment landed Bolton the job of U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, despite his stringent animosity toward the world body. Today, he spends his time calling for war with Iran.

11. John Yoo — As a lawyer for the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel, Yoo authored a series of legal memos detainee to be buried alive.

12. Ari Fleischer — Bush's first press secretary helped redefine the role as that of liar-in-chief rather than informer of the public, earning a reputation as "the world's most dishonest flack." Whereas his successors sometimes looked uncomfortable lying, Fleischer was having fun, spinning a cowed and gullible press corps through two massive tax cuts and the initiation of a war undertaken on false pretenses.

13. John Ashcroft — In 2003, as Bush's first Attorney General, Ashcroft approved waterboarding and other torture techniques on detainees. Ashcroft's nomination was controversial, as he had a history of opposing school desegregation. The chief architect of the invasive Patriot Act, Ashcroft maintains to this day that Bush is "among the most respectful of all leaders ever" of civil liberties.

14. Henry Paulson — Even as the financial system was crashing down around him, Treasury Secretary Paulson insisted for months that the banking system was "safe and sound." Once he decided that the economy needed saving, Paulson requested nearly unfettered authority to send billions of taxpayer dollars to banks with no oversight.

15. L. Paul Bremer — This Presidential Medal of Freedom winner took over the Coalition Provisional Authority in May 2003. Under his mismanagement, the insurgency exploded in Iraq. Bremer claimed he had all the troops he needed to secure the country, overestimated the strength of the new U.S.-trained Iraqi army, disbanded the Iraqi army leaving thousands of Iraqi soldiers with no income and no occupation, and enacted a de-Baathification law that barred many experienced Iraqis from government positions.

16. Bradley Schlozman — As a recent DOJ Inspector General report demonstrates, Schlozman was a central figure in Bush's politicization of the Justice Department. Violating civil service laws, Schlozman used political and ideological considerations to ensure that only "right-thinking Americans" received jobs. He eventually lied to Congress about his efforts.

17. J. Steven Griles — A former energy lobbyist and no. 2 official in the Interior Department, Griles went to jail for lying to Congress about illegal favors he did for corrupt lobbyist Jack Abramoff. Griles also abused his position "to unlock nearly every legal barrier to exploitation" of our nation's oil and mineral reserves. Before his conviction, Griles left the White House to become a lobbyist for ConocoPhillips.

18. Condoleezza Rice — As Bush's national security adviser, Rice was another strong advocate for invading Iraq, once famously warning that the U.S. should attack Iraq and not wait for solid proof of its WMD because "we don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud." Rice also ignored an urgent warning from the CIA before the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks that a strike inside the U.S. was imminent.

19. Scooter Libby — Cheney's former chief of staff was a key player in the outing of CIA operative Valerie Plame as part of the Bush administration's quest to punish Plame's husband, former ambassador Joseph Wilson, for publishing an op-ed debunking one of the White House's main justifications for invading Iraq. Libby was ultimately convicted of perjury and obstructing justice in a federal investigation into Plame's outing but later had his 30-month prison sentence commuted by Bush.

20. Monica Goodling — Goodling was the most notorious graduate of Pat Robertson's Regent University during her tenure in the Justice Department. As the White House liaison at the DOJ, she based the department's hiring of candidates on their sexual preference, GOP loyalty, and adherence to conservative ideology.

21. Alphonso Jackson — As Housing and Urban Development Secretary, Jackson let the U.S. housing market crumble while he was busy giving lucrative contracts to his golfing buddies, retaliating against Bush critics, and erecting giant photo homages to himself.

22. Michael Hayden — As director of the National Security Agency, Hayden ran Bush's warrantless wiretapping program and misled Congress about the program's legality. After moving to the CIA, he dismissed the destruction of evidence implicating the CIA in torture as "in line with the law."

23. Lurita Doan — The former head of the General Services Administration (GSA)who doled out a no-bid contract to a friend, Doan famously hosted a meeting of White House political operatives where she asked how GSA employees could "help 'our candidates' in the next election." After the Office of Special Counsel called for her firing, she was forced to resign

24. Gale Norton — A former industry lobbyist and Bush's first Secretary of the Interior, Norton pushed a radical ideological agenda "through regulatory rollbacks, suppression of science, preferential treatment, and collusion with industry" — including doctoring scientific findings on the impacts of oil drilling on caribou. After resigning under the cloud of ties to Jack Abramoff, she joined Shell Oil.

25. Lester Crawford — After promising to act on the morning-after contraceptive pill during his confirmation hearings, the former FDA Commissioner "indefinitely postponed nonprescription sales of emergency contraception over the objections of staff scientists who had declared the pill safe." Crawford resigned after just two months on the job and later pleaded guilty "to charges that he hid his ownership of stock in food and drug companies that his agency regulated."

26. Harriet Miers — Well-known for being Bush's failed Supreme Court nominee, Miers also thought it was "important" to her as White House Counsel that Rove protege Tim Griffin was installed as a U.S. Attorney, making her a central figure in the U.S. Attorney scandal. She is said to have called Bush "the most brilliant man she had ever met."

27. Hans Von Spakovsky — Originally a political appointee in the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department, Spakovsky "injected partisan political factors into decision-making" and used every opportunity "to make it difficult for voters — poor, minority and Democratic — to go to the polls." In 2008, Spakovsky withdrew his name from consideration for the FEC, following months of opposition from lawmakers and civil rights groups.

28. Tommy Franks — As head of U.S. Central Command from 2000 to 2003, Franks oversaw Osama bin Laden's great escape from Afghanistan, gave orders for the stabilization of Iraq via PowerPoint, assumed that the U.S. would draw down to 25,000 troops by the end of 2004, and had American soldiers stand idly by as chaos and lawlessness took hold after the invasion.

29. Thomas Scully — As chief administrator for the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services, Scully was the White House's head negotiator on the Medicare prescription drug bill. Scully threatened to fire chief actuary Richard Foster if he revealed that Bush's Medicare Part D legislation "would cost 25% to 50% more than the Bush administration's public estimates."

30. Julie MacDonald — A top Interior Department appointee, MacDonald "interjected herself personally and profoundly" and "tainted nearly every decision made on the protection of endangered species" over a five-year period, intimidating the staff with "abrupt and abrasive, if not abusive" tactics. MacDonald also leaked government documents to a young acquaintance whom she met while playing "internet role-playing games."

31. William Haynes — As the former general counsel at the Defense Department, he was part of a five-person team of high-level administration lawyers, dubbed the "War Council," that tossed the Geneva Conventions aside and hatched out the legal framework for torture in secret meetings.

32. David Safavian — Safavian was (twice) tried and convicted for his role in the jack Abramoff scandal. Safavian was found guilty of "lying and obstructing justice" in an attempt to cover-up "his many efforts to assist Abramoff in acquiring two properties controlled by the GSA."

33. James Connaughton — As chairman of the White House Council of Environmental Quality, Connaughton wrote EPA press releases downplaying the danger of the air quality in lower Manhattan following 9/11. "A former lobbyist for utilities, mining, chemical, and other industrial polluters," Connaughton insisted "there's a lot of disagreement" about humans' impact on global warming, and he touted a bogus study purporting to show that the 20th century was not unusually warm.

34. William Luti — A former Navy officer and Cheney aide, Luti was dispatched to the Pentagon in 2001 to work underneath Feith to find "evidence" to support his boss's belief in conspiracy theories linking Saddam to al Qaeda. Luti was an integral component of Cheney's campaign to pressure intelligence professionals to conform their judgments to administration policy rather than reality.

35. Susan Orr — As Assistant Deputy Secretary for Population Affairs, this former Family Research Council official It's not a medical necessity that you have [contraception]."

36. Christopher Cox — Under Chairman Cox, the Securities and Exchange Commission censored internal reports showing that it ignored critical signs pointing to Wall Street's meltdown. Cox's SEC also failed to detect Bernie Madoff's $50 billion Ponzi scheme, despite a decade of warnings.

37. Elliott Abrams — An Iran-Contra convict pardoned by Bush 41, Abrams was named by Bush 43 as the Special Assistant to the President and Senior Director for Democracy, Human Rights, and International Operations. As a foundingIsrael's 2006 bombing of Lebanon into Syria and advocated a Fatah coup after Hamas won the February 2006 Palestinian elections.

38. Philip Cooney — A former oil lobbyist who served as chief of staff of the White House Council on Environmental Quality, Cooney doctored climate reports to "soften" words and phrases linking greenhouse gas emissions to global warming. After his political interference was revealed, Cooney left the White House to become a lobbyist for Exxon.

39. Colin Powell — Though Bush called him "an American hero" when he appointed him to be the first African-American Secretary of State, Powell placed an ugly "blot" on his record when he pushed the Bush administration's faulty case for the Iraq war in a speech to the U.N. on Feb.5, 2003, using inaccurate information. Liberal hawks and the media rallied around Powell's false case, calling it the "winning hand" for war.

40. Elaine Chao — The Labor Secretary made it through all eight years of the Bush administration, driving morale at the Labor Department so low that staffers threw a "good-riddance party" to cheer her departure. She leaves behind a "deeply troubled department" that "spent eight years attacking workers' rights, strong workplace health and safety rules, and unions while they carried the water for Big Business."

41. Julie Myers — After being hired as head of Immigration and Customs Enforcement based on little more than her personal connections, Myers made herself famous by awarding "Most Original Costume" to an employee who dressed up in blackface and a prison costume for Halloween. She was also heavily criticized for conducting politically-motivated immigration raids.

42. Wade Horn — As Assistant Secretary for Community Initiatives at the Department of Health and Human Services, Horn funneled millions of tax-payer dollars into right-wing abstinence-only programs. Shortly before he resigned, it was revealed that he had given nearly $1 million "to the National Fatherhood Initiative (NFI), where he was the president for at least three years until joining the Bush administration in 2001."

43. George Deutsch — As a young, inexperienced press officer for NASA, Deutsch "told public affairs workers to limit reporters' access to a top climate scientist and told a Web designer to add the word 'theory' at every mention of the Big Bang." He resigned in 2006 after it was discovered he had lied on his resume, falsely claiming that he had a journalism degree from Texas A&M.

Dishonorable Mentions: Bush appointees who didn't quite make the list included a child pornography aficionado, a patron of hookers, a shoplifter, a mail fraudster, an operator of an illegal horse gambling ring, and a CIA official who took bribes in the form of prostitutes.

Posted at: Think Progress

954-394-4980

Bye Bye Bush

2009-01-17T08:21:00.002-05:00

954-394-4980

Message From Howard Dean

2009-01-14T16:04:00.002-05:00

Four years ago, I became chairman with a mandate for bottom-up reform -- grow the Democratic Party in your neighborhood and every other community in America.

We promised to compete in every state, for every level of office. And we demanded a party that would stand up for itself and fight for an agenda that reflects our values.

When the 447 members of the Democratic National Committee elected me, it wasn't because they thought I could accomplish these things.

They elected me because I knew that only you could.

I believed then -- and I believe now -- that every single one of us must take responsibility for building our party. It's not enough to simply vote for Democrats -- in order to win, every one of us must deliver our message and values into our own communities. We must organize.

Four years later, we have more Democratic state legislators and governors. We expanded the electoral map, regained a majority in both houses of Congress, and put a Democratic president in the White House.

We did it by rebuilding the party infrastructure from the ground up, creating a truly national voter database, and developing 21st century campaign tools that merged traditional organizing with new technology.

I said on my first day on the job that this wouldn't be my chairmanship -- it would be ours together. And you reshaped the political landscape over these four years.

Next week, I will step down after four years as chairman of the Democratic National Committee.

I'd like to congratulate Governor Tim Kaine of Virginia, who will take my place as Chairman on January 21st. He will be an excellent leader in the years ahead.

I know a lot of people are wondering what to expect as we move forward. I can assure you that Governor Kaine will continue the grassroots approach that has made our party and Barack Obama's campaign so successful.

Governor Kaine knows first-hand what a commitment to fighting everywhere means -- Virginia is a prime example of what can happen when we refuse to concede any part of this country and build our organization everywhere.

In that spirit of grassroots engagement, Governor Kaine has offered to answer your questions personally in a video on Democrats.org.

Submit your question for incoming DNC Chairman Tim Kaine.

Democrats have made great gains over the past four years, but we still have a lot of work to do to get this country back on course.

Governor Kaine knows that the strength of our party comes from the bottom up, and he will need your support as we take the next steps to grow our party and elect Democrats everywhere.

You've done a lot over the last six months, and over the last four years. You've donated money, talked to friends, knocked on doors. You've invested yourself in the political process. And it's tempting to take it easy after a big victory.

But these are not short-term investments. We will only create lasting change if that sense of obligation to one another and responsibility for the common good becomes a permanent part of our lives.

Martin Luther King, Jr. said, "Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter."

We cannot be silent. We cannot leave it to others to see this through.

Thank you for everything you did for our cause in this election and over the last four years.

But we are not stopping here. And even though my term as chairman is ending, I will be with you -- and with our new chairman -- every step of the way.

Thank you again,

Howard Dean

Clinton Enjoys High Favorable Ratings

2009-01-13T13:21:00.002-05:00

National Issues Poll (1/13) - Synopsis

A new Gallup Poll finds 65% of Americans saying they have a favorable opinion of Hillary Clinton, the highest rating for her in almost 10 years

>> More

954-394-4980

Behind Harvey Milk

2008-12-21T20:19:00.005-05:00

Harvey Milk's platform was one of hope -- a legacy that resonates today. Before his untimely death in 1978, he had become a hero for all Americans.

Behind Harvey Milk Part 1

More Gay & Lesbian Video

Behind Harvey Milk II

More Gay & Lesbian Video

Behind Harvey Milk Part III

More Gay & Lesbian Video

Days Without Sunshine: Anita Bryant's Anti-Gay Crusade

CLICK HERE

10 Policies We Can All Agree On

2008-12-13T10:06:00.002-05:00

What Americans Really Want: 10 Policies We Can All Agree On

By Sarah van Gelder, YES! Magazine. .

Here is an agenda that the majority of Americans support, whether they vote red, blue, green or something else.

President-elect Barack Obama faces huge challenges when he takes office. But he's got one asset that is rarely mentioned. Large majorities of Americans agree on some of the most important issues of the day, from health care to foreign policy. These "Ten Policies for a Better America" shows an agenda a majority supports -- whether we vote red, blue, or some other political color.

ECONOMY

Repair and rebuild neglected bridges, railroads, schools, and other infrastructure, designing for climate change & a post-petroleum world.
Extend unemployment insurance benefits.
Provide tax relief to middle- and low-income families, and reinstate fair taxes on high-wealth individuals and corporate profits.
Adopt the Employee Free Choice Act to increase opportunities to unionize.

67% Favor public works projects to create jobs.

55% Favor expanding unemployment benefits.

73% Say corporations don't pay a fair share of taxes.

76% Support tax cuts for lower- and middle-income people.

71% Say unions help their members; 53% say unions help the economy in general.

[Sources]

FAMILIES

Make the minimum wage a "living wage" adequate to keep working families out of poverty.
Provide everyone vacation and family leave.
Provide gay and lesbian couples with the legal protections afforded to straight couples.
Make bankruptcy and foreclosure laws protect families first, not predatory lenders.

80% Support increasing the federal minimum wage.

59% Favor guaranteeing two weeks or more of paid vacation.

75% Want to limit rate increases on adjustable-rate mortgages.

64% Are not confident that life for our children's generation will be better than it has been for us.

65% Believe same-sex couples should be allowed to marry or form civil unions.

[Sources]

CONSTITUTION

Fully restore habeas corpus for all people in U.S. custody.
Protect our right to privacy and freedom from warrantless search and seizure.
Keep the internet free of corporate and government censorship and obstruction. Protect "net neutrality."
Restore the balance of power between the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of government.

70% Support restoring habeas corpus rights for detainees at Guantanamo.

58% Believe a court warrant should be required to listen to the telephone calls of people in the U.S.

59% Would like the next president to do more to protect civil liberties.

68% Believe the president should not act alone to fight terrorism without the checks and balances of the courts or Congress.

[Sources]

ENERGY & CLIMATE

Take a leadership role in reducing our own greenhouse gas emissions.
Maximize the conservation and efficient use of existing energy supplies.
Launch and fund ambitious research & development programs, offer tax credits, invest in public works projects, and focus government procurement to jump- start renewable energy deployment.
Invest in public transit and intercity rail.
Tax carbon; use revenues for renewables and to help ratepayers.

79% Favor mandatory controls on greenhouse gas emissions.

76% Believe that oil is running out and a major effort is needed to replace it.

90% Favor higher auto fuel efficiency standards.

75% Favor clean electricity, even with higher rates.

72% Support more funding for mass transit.

[Sources]

HEALTH CARE

Offer all Americans the option of joining a single-payer national health insurance program, paid for with tax dollars.
Break the drug companies' monopoly and lower drug prices by allowing Americans to buy prescription drugs abroad.

73% Believe our health care system is in crisis or has "major problems."

64% Believe the government should provide national health insurance coverage for all Americans, even if it would raise taxes.

55% Favor one health insurance program covering all Americans, administered by the government, and paid for by taxpayers.

69% Believe the government should make it easier to buy prescription drugs from other countries.

[Sources]

FOREIGN RELATIONS

Lead a global effort to abolish nuclear weapons.
Rule out unilateral attacks, deploying weapons in space, and torture.
Phase out U.S. role as global police, and instead work through the U.N. and other international agencies to develop and enforce international law.
Work with other countries to improve global health and environment.

81% Oppose torture and support following the Geneva Conventions.

76% Say the U.S. should not play the role of global police.

79% Say the U.N. should be strengthened.

73% Favor abolishing nuclear weapons, with verification. 80% favor banning weapons in space.

85% Say that the U.S. should not initiate military action without support from allies.

[Sources]

IRAQ & IRAN

Develop a timetable for a withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq.
Build no long-term military bases in Iraq. Leave control of Iraq's oil in the hands of Iraqis.
Fund an international effort to help restore the economy and infrastructure of Iraq.
Abolish future uses of private mercenaries.
Enter into negotiations with Iran about nuclear issues and regional stability. End threats of attack and attempts to destabilize the Iranian government.

63% Want U.S. forces home from Iraq within a year.

47% Favor using diplomacy with Iran. 7% favor military action.

57% Say going to war in Iraq was the wrong decision.

67% Believe we should use diplomatic and economic means to fight terrorism, rather than the military.

[Sources]

ELECTIONS

Provide public financing for elections campaigns.
Bring back the Fairness Doctrine and get broadcasters to open the people's airwaves to free campaign information.
Require voter-verified paper ballots that are audited and can be recounted.
End partisan districting and voter-roll purges.
Fully implement the Voting Rights Act and enforce existing laws against vote suppression.
Restore voting rights to ex-felons who have served their sentences.

86% Say big companies have too much power.

74% Favor voluntary public financing of campaigns.

66% Believe intentional acts are likely to cause significant voting machines errors.

80% Say ex-felons should have their voting rights restored.

[Sources]

CRIMINAL JUSTICE

Drop punitive sentences for drug possession and other nonviolent offenses in favor of substance-abuse treatment, fines, community service, and restitution.
Offer training and counseling to prepare inmates for a crime-free life after release.
Channel youth into schools and jobs, not jail.

65% Believe attacking social problems is a better cure for crime than more law enforcement.

87% Support rehabilitation rather than a "punishment-only" system.

81% Say job training is "very important" for reintegrating people leaving prison. 79% say drug treatment is very important.

[Sources]

IMMIGRATION

Implement trade policies that strengthen, not undermine, rural economies south of the border, reducing the poverty and displacement that spur migration. Start by ditching NAFTA.
Increase minimum wage and worker protection for all, documented and undocumented.
Provide a pathway to legal status and citizenship for immigrants already here.

56% Believe NAFTA should be renegotiated.

64% Believe that on the whole, immigration is good for the country.

80% Favor allowing undocumented immigrants living in the U.S. to stay and apply for citizenship if they have a job and pay back taxes.

[Sources]

Sarah van Gelder is Executive Editor of YES! Magazine where you can read her blog.

954-394-4980

5 Disastrous Decisions That Got Us into This Economic Mess

2008-12-11T09:33:00.002-05:00

By Joseph Stiglitz, Vanity Fair.

We are at a dangerous moment. Behind the debates over future economic policy is a debate over history -- here are the major mistakes that got us here.

There will come a moment when the most urgent threats posed by the credit crisis have eased and the larger task before us will be to chart a direction for the economic steps ahead. This will be a dangerous moment. Behind the debates over future policy is a debate over history -- a debate over the causes of our current situation. The battle for the past will determine the battle for the present. So it's crucial to get the history straight.

What were the critical decisions that led to the crisis? Mistakes were made at every fork in the road -- we had what engineers call a "system failure," when not a single decision but a cascade of decisions produce a tragic result. Let's look at five key moments.

No. 1: Firing the Chairman

In 1987 the Reagan administration decided to remove Paul Volcker as chairman of the Federal Reserve Board and appoint Alan Greenspan in his place. Volcker had done what central bankers are supposed to do. On his watch, inflation had been brought down from more than 11 percent to under 4 percent. In the world of central banking, that should have earned him a grade of A+++ and assured his re-appointment. But Volcker also understood that financial markets need to be regulated. Reagan wanted someone who did not believe any such thing, and he found him in a devotee of the objectivist philosopher and free-market zealot Ayn Rand.

Greenspan played a double role. The Fed controls the money spigot, and in the early years of this decade, he turned it on full force. But the Fed is also a regulator. If you appoint an anti-regulator as your enforcer, you know what kind of enforcement you'll get. A flood of liquidity combined with the failed levees of regulation proved disastrous.

Greenspan presided over not one but two financial bubbles. After the high-tech bubble popped, in 2000-2001, he helped inflate the housing bubble. The first responsibility of a central bank should be to maintain the stability of the financial system. If banks lend on the basis of artificially high asset prices, the result can be a meltdown -- as we are seeing now, and as Greenspan should have known. He had many of the tools he needed to cope with the situation. To deal with the high-tech bubble, he could have increased margin requirements (the amount of cash people need to put down to buy stock). To deflate the housing bubble, he could have curbed predatory lending to low-income households and prohibited other insidious practices (the no-documentation -- or "liar" -- loans, the interest-only loans, and so on). This would have gone a long way toward protecting us. If he didn't have the tools, he could have gone to Congress and asked for them.

Of course, the current problems with our financial system are not solely the result of bad lending. The banks have made mega-bets with one another through complicated instruments such as derivatives, credit-default swaps, and so forth. With these, one party pays another if certain events happen -- for instance, if Bear Stearns goes bankrupt, or if the dollar soars. These instruments were originally created to help manage risk -- but they can also be used to gamble. Thus, if you felt confident that the dollar was going to fall, you could make a big bet accordingly, and if the dollar indeed fell, your profits would soar. The problem is that, with this complicated intertwining of bets of great magnitude, no one could be sure of the financial position of anyone else -- or even of one's own position. Not surprisingly, the credit markets froze.

Here too Greenspan played a role. When I was chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers, during the Clinton administration, I served on a committee of all the major federal financial regulators, a group that included Greenspan and Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin. Even then, it was clear that derivatives posed a danger. We didn't put it as memorably as Warren Buffett -- who saw derivatives as "financial weapons of mass destruction" -- but we took his point. And yet, for all the risk, the deregulators in charge of the financial system -- at the Fed, at the Securities and Exchange Commission, and elsewhere -- decided to do nothing, worried that any action might interfere with "innovation" in the financial system. But innovation, like "change," has no inherent value. It can be bad (the "liar" loans are a good example) as well as good.

No. 2: Tearing Down the Walls

The deregulation philosophy would pay unwelcome dividends for years to come. In November 1999, Congress repealed the Glass-Steagall Act -- the culmination of a $300 million lobbying effort by the banking and financial-services industries, and spearheaded in Congress by Senator Phil Gramm. Glass-Steagall had long separated commercial banks (which lend money) and investment banks (which organize the sale of bonds and equities); it had been enacted in the aftermath of the Great Depression and was meant to curb the excesses of that era, including grave conflicts of interest. For instance, without separation, if a company whose shares had been issued by an investment bank, with its strong endorsement, got into trouble, wouldn't its commercial arm, if it had one, feel pressure to lend it money, perhaps unwisely? An ensuing spiral of bad judgment is not hard to foresee. I had opposed repeal of Glass-Steagall. The proponents said, in effect, Trust us: we will create Chinese walls to make sure that the problems of the past do not recur. As an economist, I certainly possessed a healthy degree of trust, trust in the power of economic incentives to bend human behavior toward self-interest -- toward short-term self-interest, at any rate, rather than Tocqueville's "self interest rightly understood."

The most important consequence of the repeal of Glass-Steagall was indirect -- it lay in the way repeal changed an entire culture. Commercial banks are not supposed to be high-risk ventures; they are supposed to manage other people's money very conservatively. It is with this understanding that the government agrees to pick up the tab should they fail. Investment banks, on the other hand, have traditionally managed rich people's money -- people who can take bigger risks in order to get bigger returns. When repeal of Glass-Steagall brought investment and commercial banks together, the investment-bank culture came out on top. There was a demand for the kind of high returns that could be obtained only through high leverage and big risktaking.

There were other important steps down the deregulatory path. One was the decision in April 2004 by the Securities and Exchange Commission, at a meeting attended by virtually no one and largely overlooked at the time, to allow big investment banks to increase their debt-to-capital ratio (from 12:1 to 30:1, or higher) so that they could buy more mortgage-backed securities, inflating the housing bubble in the process. In agreeing to this measure, the S.E.C. argued for the virtues of self-regulation: the peculiar notion that banks can effectively police themselves. Self-regulation is preposterous, as even Alan Greenspan now concedes, and as a practical matter it can't, in any case, identify systemic risks -- the kinds of risks that arise when, for instance, the models used by each of the banks to manage their portfolios tell all the banks to sell some security all at once.

As we stripped back the old regulations, we did nothing to address the new challenges posed by 21st-century markets. The most important challenge was that posed by derivatives. In 1998 the head of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Brooksley Born, had called for such regulation -- a concern that took on urgency after the Fed, in that same year, engineered the bailout of Long-Term Capital Management, a hedge fund whose trillion-dollar-plus failure threatened global financial markets. But Secretary of the Treasury Robert Rubin, his deputy, Larry Summers, and Greenspan were adamant -- and successful -- in their opposition. Nothing was done.

No. 3: Applying the Leeches

Then along came the Bush tax cuts, enacted first on June 7, 2001, with a follow-on installment two years later. The president and his advisers seemed to believe that tax cuts, especially for upper-income Americans and corporations, were a cure-all for any economic disease -- the modern-day equivalent of leeches. The tax cuts played a pivotal role in shaping the background conditions of the current crisis. Because they did very little to stimulate the economy, real stimulation was left to the Fed, which took up the task with unprecedented low-interest rates and liquidity. The war in Iraq made matters worse, because it led to soaring oil prices. With America so dependent on oil imports, we had to spend several hundred billion more to purchase oil -- money that otherwise would have been spent on American goods. Normally this would have led to an economic slowdown, as it had in the 1970s. But the Fed met the challenge in the most myopic way imaginable. The flood of liquidity made money readily available in mortgage markets, even to those who would normally not be able to borrow. And, yes, this succeeded in forestalling an economic downturn; America's household saving rate plummeted to zero. But it should have been clear that we were living on borrowed money and borrowed time.

The cut in the tax rate on capital gains contributed to the crisis in another way. It was a decision that turned on values: those who speculated (read: gambled) and won were taxed more lightly than wage earners who simply worked hard. But more than that, the decision encouraged leveraging, because interest was tax-deductible. If, for instance, you borrowed a million to buy a home or took a $100,000 home-equity loan to buy stock, the interest would be fully deductible every year. Any capital gains you made were taxed lightly -- and at some possibly remote day in the future. The Bush administration was providing an open invitation to excessive borrowing and lending -- not that American consumers needed any more encouragement.

No. 4: Faking the Numbers

Meanwhile, on July 30, 2002, in the wake of a series of major scandals -- notably the collapse of WorldCom and Enron -- Congress passed the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. The scandals had involved every major American accounting firm, most of our banks, and some of our premier companies, and made it clear that we had serious problems with our accounting system. Accounting is a sleep-inducing topic for most people, but if you can't have faith in a company's numbers, then you can't have faith in anything about a company at all. Unfortunately, in the negotiations over what became Sarbanes-Oxley a decision was made not to deal with what many, including the respected former head of the S.E.C. Arthur Levitt, believed to be a fundamental underlying problem: stock options. Stock options have been defended as providing healthy incentives toward good management, but in fact they are "incentive pay" in name only. If a company does well, the C.E.O. gets great rewards in the form of stock options; if a company does poorly, the compensation is almost as substantial but is bestowed in other ways. This is bad enough. But a collateral problem with stock options is that they provide incentives for bad accounting: top management has every incentive to provide distorted information in order to pump up share prices.

The incentive structure of the rating agencies also proved perverse. Agencies such as Moody's and Standard & Poor's are paid by the very people they are supposed to grade. As a result, they've had every reason to give companies high ratings, in a financial version of what college professors know as grade inflation. The rating agencies, like the investment banks that were paying them, believed in financial alchemy -- that F-rated toxic mortgages could be converted into products that were safe enough to be held by commercial banks and pension funds. We had seen this same failure of the rating agencies during the East Asia crisis of the 1990s: high ratings facilitated a rush of money into the region, and then a sudden reversal in the ratings brought devastation. But the financial overseers paid no attention.

No. 5: Letting It Bleed

The final turning point came with the passage of a bailout package on October 3, 2008 -- that is, with the administration's response to the crisis itself. We will be feeling the consequences for years to come. Both the administration and the Fed had long been driven by wishful thinking, hoping that the bad news was just a blip, and that a return to growth was just around the corner. As America's banks faced collapse, the administration veered from one course of action to another. Some institutions (Bear Stearns, A.I.G., Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac) were bailed out. Lehman Brothers was not. Some shareholders got something back. Others did not.

The original proposal by Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, a three-page document that would have provided $700 billion for the secretary to spend at his sole discretion, without oversight or judicial review, was an act of extraordinary arrogance. He sold the program as necessary to restore confidence. But it didn't address the underlying reasons for the loss of confidence. The banks had made too many bad loans. There were big holes in their balance sheets. No one knew what was truth and what was fiction. The bailout package was like a massive transfusion to a patient suffering from internal bleeding -- and nothing was being done about the source of the problem, namely all those foreclosures. Valuable time was wasted as Paulson pushed his own plan, "cash for trash," buying up the bad assets and putting the risk onto American taxpayers. When he finally abandoned it, providing banks with money they needed, he did it in a way that not only cheated America's taxpayers but failed to ensure that the banks would use the money to re-start lending. He even allowed the banks to pour out money to their shareholders as taxpayers were pouring money into the banks.

The other problem not addressed involved the looming weaknesses in the economy. The economy had been sustained by excessive borrowing. That game was up. As consumption contracted, exports kept the economy going, but with the dollar strengthening and Europe and the rest of the world declining, it was hard to see how that could continue. Meanwhile, states faced massive drop-offs in revenues -- they would have to cut back on expenditures. Without quick action by government, the economy faced a downturn. And even if banks had lent wisely -- which they hadn't -- the downturn was sure to mean an increase in bad debts, further weakening the struggling financial sector.

The administration talked about confidence building, but what it delivered was actually a confidence trick. If the administration had really wanted to restore confidence in the financial system, it would have begun by addressing the underlying problems -- the flawed incentive structures and the inadequate regulatory system.

Was there any single decision which, had it been reversed, would have changed the course of history? Every decision -- including decisions not to do something, as many of our bad economic decisions have been -- is a consequence of prior decisions, an interlinked web stretching from the distant past into the future. You'll hear some on the right point to certain actions by the government itself -- such as the Community Reinvestment Act, which requires banks to make mortgage money available in low-income neighborhoods. (Defaults on C.R.A. lending were actually much lower than on other lending.) There has been much finger-pointing at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the two huge mortgage lenders, which were originally government-owned. But in fact they came late to the subprime game, and their problem was similar to that of the private sector: their C.E.O.'s had the same perverse incentive to indulge in gambling.

The truth is most of the individual mistakes boil down to just one: a belief that markets are self-adjusting and that the role of government should be minimal. Looking back at that belief during hearings this fall on Capitol Hill, Alan Greenspan said out loud, "I have found a flaw." Congressman Henry Waxman pushed him, responding, "In other words, you found that your view of the world, your ideology, was not right; it was not working." "Absolutely, precisely," Greenspan said. The embrace by America -- and much of the rest of the world -- of this flawed economic philosophy made it inevitable that we would eventually arrive at the place we are today.

RonMills.us is making this material available in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107: This article is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.

954-394-4980

Protect Marriage, Protect Children, Prohibit Divorce

2008-12-03T22:15:00.000-05:00

See more funny videos at Funny or Die

Sign the petition CLICK HERE

GLAAD/Harris post-election survey: Americans favor adoption and partner rights for same-sex couples

2008-12-03T10:29:00.002-05:00

And they support inclusive hate crimes laws and the ability of gays and lesbians to openly serve in the military. The voters in California, Florida and Arkansas clearly aren't on the same page as most Americans when it comes to extending rights to gay couples.

A national survey conducted in November, "The Pulse of Equality" by Harris Interactive that was commissioned by the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD) is out today. The survey is the first national snapshot after election day to poll U.S. adults' overall attitudes towards LGBTs on several key issues. Read The Survey

Source: Pam's House Blend

954-394-4980

Mormons Losing Members Over Anti-Gay Campaigns

2008-12-01T07:59:00.001-05:00

The Mormon Church hierarchy organized millions of dollars and thousands of hours of manpower to pass California's Proposition 8 and Arizona's Prop 102, but the church's tactics haven't sat so well with some of its members--including families, members with Mormon heritage going back 150 years.Someday, the people and the churches who oppose allowing gay and lesbian peoples to commit legally to loving married relationships will come to be seen as just as bigoted as those who opposed civil rights for African Americans. Given that its people have suffered from bigotry over the years, the Mormon church should be ashamed to represent that kind of bigotry today.

read more | digg story

Volunteer On A Day Without a Gay Day

2008-11-25T08:52:00.002-05:00

We are calling for a nationwide strike and economic boycott by all members of our Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgendered community AND OUR STRAIGHT ALLIES on December 10th, 2008, International Human Rights Day.

WHY SHOULD WE DO IT?

Because LGBT workers, business owners, consumers and taxpayers contribute over $700 billion to the U.S. economy each year and should not be treated as second class citizens. See www.witeckcombs.com/news/releases/20080602_buyingpower.pdf

Because general strikes and economic boycotts are a powerful weapon in the history of non-violent protests. See http://www.pbs.org/now/society/boycott.html. For many of those protesters, their actions came at a cost, but they understood that we must be willing to make sacrifices to fight for equal rights, including the right to marry.

Because Civil Unions are only legal in the state that offers them. Civil Unions don't include the 1100 marriage rights and benefits provided by the Federal Government. Separate but not equal is discrimination.

Because every couple in America has to get a marriage certificate from their state, whereas religious ceremonies are optional. No church or religious institution has or ever will be forced to marry anyone.

Because marriage should be a Right for all Americans, regardless of gender, race OR religion.

Because until ALL are equal, NONE are equal.

WHAT SHOULD WE DO?

Strike: call in gay, shut down your business, take the day off.

Boycott: don't buy anything or spend money.

Participate: visit www.daywithoutagay.org for a list of volunteer and/or protest opportunities.

Communicate: we need everyone's support!

Our co-sponsors include:
JOINTHEIMPACT.COM
DAYWITHOUTAGAY.ORG
DAYWITHOUTAGAY.NET
GAYS ON STRIKE (on Facebook)

WHY THE NAME "A DAY WITHOUT GAYS"? The name was inspired by the film A DAY WITHOUT A MEXICAN and the nationwide strike in 2006 called A DAY WITHOUT IMMIGRANTS, protesting proposed immigration laws.

Anyone interested it the facts regarding Proposition 8 should go to:http://www.noonprop8.com/about/fact-vs-fiction

954-394-4980

Congress Opposes Bush Pardons

2008-11-21T17:02:00.002-05:00

Nadler Introduces Resolution Opposing Possible Bush Pardons of His Own Subordinates for Crimes He Authorized

By David Swanson

Here's a resolution, hot off the presses from Jerrold Nadler, Chair of the Constitution Subcommittee of the House Judiciary Committee:H.RES.1531, "Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the President of the United States should not issue pardons to senior members of his administration during the final 90 days of his term of office," Sponsor: Rep Nadler, Jerrold [NY-8] (introduced 11/20/2008).

There will be a petition promoting this resolution, through which you can write to your representative and senators at http://democrats.com/nadler-pardons

Senator Russ Feingold editorialized against these possible pardons at Salon.com yesterday; please urge him to introduce in the Senate the same resolution that Nadler has in the House.

Never before has a president pardoned himself or his subordinates for crimes he authorized. The idea that the pardon power constitutionally includes such pardons ignores a thousand year tradition in which no man can sit in judgment of himself, and the fact that James Madison and George Mason argued that the reason we needed the impeachment power was that a president might some day try to pardon someone for a crime that he himself was involved in. The problem is not preemptive pardons of people not yet tried and convicted. The problem is not blanket pardons of unnamed masses of people. Both of those types of pardons have been issued in the past and have their appropriate place. The problem is the complete elimination of any semblance of the rule of law by pardoning one's own subordinates for crimes you instructed them to commit.

Yes, of course, there's something absurd about knowing that a president authorized crimes, not impeaching him, not prosecuting him, not proposing any action with any teeth at all, but formally objecting to the idea of him issuing pardons of his own subordinates for crimes he authorized. But this is where we are. State, local, civil, foreign, and international prosecutions are likely ways of holding Bush, Cheney, and gang accountable, and pardons can't interfere with them. Pardons can't interfere with impeachment. But if we allow these pardons, we not only guarantee no federal prosecutions, and not only give Congress an excuse to drop its investigations, but we also establish the precedent that from here on out any president can violate any law and then pardon the crime. This is simply to end the idea of law. We cannot allow that.

We need to work with Congressman Nadler and Senator Feingold to promote awareness of what is wrong with self-pardons. In this way we can prepare the American public for the appropriate response when the pardons come.The appropriate response will be to demand:

1. Immediate impeachment of Bush and Cheney, even if they are out of office.

2. Overturning of the pardons, as Bush's lawyers told him he could do to Clinton's pardon of Marc Rich, which was a far more minor abuse of the pardon power.

3. Legislation banning self-pardons and pardons of crimes authorized by the president.

4. A Constitutional Amendment banning self-pardons and pardons of crimes authorized by the president.

5. Prosecution of Bush, Cheney, and their subordinates for their crimes.

--
To receive updates from After Downing Street register at
http://afterdowningstreet.org/user/register

954-394-4980

Open Letter to Thank Howard Dean –

2008-11-21T11:29:00.001-05:00

Governor Dean never let us down and now it's time to give him the credit he has earned. Please join me and thank Howard for getting the job done.

read more | digg story

Miami GOP Hit Man Regrets Helping Bush

2008-11-21T08:43:00.002-05:00

Roger Stone, the notorious political hitman who helped George W. Bush prevail in the 2000 Florida recount, tells The Daily Beast that he wishes he hadn't.

Roger Stone is one of the last guys on Earth one would expect to feel guilty over an episode of rough and tumble politicking. As a self-admitted hit man for the GOP, Stone has had a hand in everything from Nixon's dirty tricks to Eliot Spitzer's resignation to spreading discredited rumors of a Michelle Obama "whitey" tape during the 2008 Democratic primaries. You might call Stone the Forrest Gump of scandal, popping up to play a bit part in the most notorious negative campaigns in recent history.

The capstone of Stone's career, at least in terms of results, was the "Brooks Brothers riot" of the 2000 election recount. This was when a Stone-led squad of pro-Bush protestors stormed the Miami-Dade County election board, stopping the recount and advancing then-Governor George W. Bush one step closer to the White House. Though he is quick to rebut GOP operatives who seek to minimize his role in the recount, Stone lately has been having second thoughts about what happened in Florida.

When I look at those double-page New York Times spreads of all the individual pictures of people who have been killed [in Iraq], I got to think, 'Maybe there wouldn't have been a war if I hadn't gone to Miami-Dade.' Read More......

954-394-4980

Let's get out the vote for Jim Martin so he can help Barack in Washington DC...

2008-11-16T14:14:00.001-05:00

Neighbor To Neighbor

Help Elect 1 More Democratic Senator

Georgia Phone Campaign

Click Above To Help

Let's get out the vote for Jim Martin so he can help Barack in Washington DC...

Knowing When to Walk Away

2008-11-14T11:12:00.002-05:00

San Francisco Chronicle: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/11/13/EDAC144028.DTL
Denver Post: http://www.denverpost.com/opinion/ci_10978301

Knowing When to Walk Away

By David Sirota
Creators Syndicate, 11/14/08

It wouldn't be the George W. Bush we all know if our shamed president didn't spend his remaining White House days in a final fit of polarization.

That's what Bush's moves this week are clearly about: dividing — not uniting. The New York Times reported that during his first meeting with Barack Obama, the outgoing president suggested he might support Democrats' economic stimulus package and aid to struggling automakers if party leaders "drop their opposition to a free-trade agreement with Colombia." While Bush later denied an overt quid pro quo, one was obviously implied.

Strange behavior? Yes and no.

Bush is the Texas Hold 'Em addict who raised on the largest tax cuts in contemporary history, re-raised on two wars and went all-in with an attempt to privatize Social Security. So yes, from a brinkmanship standpoint, it seems bizarre that in exchange for a massive legislative effort to right the entire economy, the cowboy president may insist on a tiny trade deal that — at best — promises a boost of "less than seven-hundredths of one percent to U.S. gross domestic product," according to the Brookings Institution.

But, then, Bush is the protege of Karl Rove and the son of George H. W. Bush. So no, his Colombia demand isn't weird at all — nor is it as small a wager as it appears.

Bush understands what happened in 1993 when his father left an almost-finished North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) in the lap of Bill Clinton's incoming administration. He knows that business interests subsequently pressured Clinton into joining with Republicans to pass the pact over his own party's opposition. His Rove-trained mind gets what The Nation's John Nichols reported: that the payout came with a 1994 election whose NAFTA taint delivered "a dramatic drop in turnout among members of union households," decreased "Democratic support in traditional areas of strength" — and thus birthed the Republican Congress.

Bush wants to replicate this Three Card Monte — and the Colombia trade pact is his ace in the hole.

The deal would reward a right-wing Colombian regime under investigation for links to paramilitary gangs, drug cartels and anti-union brutality. Like NAFTA, it includes few labor protections, meaning it will enrich Bush's corporate donors by forcing Americans into a wage-cutting competition with low-paid foreign workers. And, most important to Bush's legacy, the pact could bust Democrats before they ever have a chance to unify.

NAFTA proved that trade is the most divisive issue inside the Democratic Party. On one side is the party's Wall Street wing that supports free trade. On the other side is its progressive wing that wants our trade policies reformed. Lately, the latter has increased its clout. As globalization became a major campaign theme in the last two elections, the watchdog group Public Citizen reports that free trade critics replaced free trade proponents in 69 House and Senate races. These new populists, along with Democrats' more senior progressive incumbents, comprise a powerful new voting bloc promising to reject deals like the Colombia agreement and protect labor and human rights.

Therefore, if Bush successfully uses the economic emergency to hustle a faction of Wall Street Democrats into supporting the deal, he will have potentially engineered a 1994 redux: Democratic infighting, a demoralized progressive base, and these newly elected fair-trade Democrats humiliated — and thus electorally endangered — by their own party standard-bearers.

Certainly, with the president betting the economy on the Colombia deal, this is a difficult, high-stakes situation for Obama. But amid all the conflicting opinions he's hearing, he has the sound advice of country music's great political sage Kenny Rogers, who counsels that gambling greatness means knowing "when to walk away."

David Sirota is a bestselling author whose newest book, "The Uprising," was just released in June of 2008. He is a fellow at the Campaign for America's Future and a board member of the Progressive States Network — both nonpartisan organizations. His blog is at www.credoaction.com/sirota.

COPYRIGHT 2008 CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC.

--------------------
David Sirota is a nationally syndicated weekly newspaper columnist for Creators Syndicate. He is a New York Times bestselling author whose second book, The Uprising, was just released in the Spring of 2008. Sirota serves as a senior fellow at the Campaign for America's Future and as a board member of the Progressive States Network - two nonpartisan 501c3 organizations. If you would like to see Sirota's Creators Syndicate column in your local newspaper, contact your local editorial page editor through this newspaper directory and point them to Sirota's Creators Syndicate website. To subscribe to Sirota's free email newsletter, go to www.davidsirota.com and sign up on the left hand side.

Source:
San Francisco Chronicle: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/11/13/EDAC144028.DTL
Denver Post: http://www.denverpost.com/opinion/ci_10978301

954-394-4980

Anti-Choice Proponents Biggest Losers Of Election 2008

2008-11-12T08:48:00.002-05:00

At almost every level, last week's election was a stinging defeat for the anti-choice movement, Many conservatives, contended that Obama will be "the most radical pro-choice president" in U.S. history.

In Congress, supporters of choice rights now hold 17 more seats in the House and at least four more in the Senate, according to NARAL Pro-Choice America. And at the state level, voters in Colorado, South Dakota and California defeated ballot measures that would have banned or restricted abortions.

Colorado voters on Tuesday rejected Amendment 48, which would have defined a "person" from the point of egg fertilization. If the measure had passed, Colorado would have become the first state to grant full constitutional rights to a fertilized egg. The potentially far-reaching ramifications of such a decision divided the anti-choice community, and the amendment lost endorsements from prominent activists who felt the personhood definition went too far. The amendment was defeated nearly 3 to 1.

Although South Dakota's Measure 11 included more exceptions to the outright abortion ban — for example, allowing abortion in rare cases of incest, rape or when the mother's life or health are endangered — than a similar initiative that was defeated in 2006, the new measure was rejected by 56% of voters. According to Kristine Wilfore, executive director of the Washington-based nonprofit Ballot Initiative Strategy Center, which advocates socially progressive issues, the initiative would have set in motion a future challenge to Roe v. Wade if passed. "It was an effort to get as close as possible to challenging Roe," Wilfore said, pointing out that South Dakota already has some of the most stringent abortion policies in the country. "This was just meant to be a test case."

Proposition 4, which would have required parental notification for girls under 18 seeking an abortion and mandated a 48-hour waiting period before the procedure, was rejected by California voters Tuesday by a vote of 52% to 48%. Prop 4 was similar to other parental-consent proposals that were defeated in 2005 and 2006.

Obama's election also dashed hopes within the anti-choice movement for possible Supreme Court vacancies over the next four years to be filled by judges who might support reversal of Roe v. Wade, the 1973 decision establishing a right to abortion.

954-394-4980

Bill Ayers speaks

2008-11-09T18:18:00.002-05:00

Looking back on a surreal campaign season

By Bill Ayers

During the primary, the blogosphere was full of chatter about my relationship with President-elect Barack Obama. We had served together on the board of the Woods Foundation and knew one another as neighbors in Chicago's Hyde Park. In 1996, at a coffee gathering that my wife, Bernardine Dohrn, and I held for him, I made a donation to his campaign for the Illinois State Senate.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article21175.htm

954-394-4980

Free-tickets to the 56th Inaugural Ceremonies

2008-11-09T09:49:00.002-05:00

Tickets to the 56th Inaugural Ceremonies will be provided free of charge and distributed through Members of the 111th Congress

For More Information Visit http://Area-Nine.org

954-394-4980

Subject: Blaming Black Voters for Prop 8 Loss is Wrong and Destructive

2008-11-08T21:22:00.002-05:00

Subject: Blaming Black Voters for Prop 8 Loss is Wrong and Destructive

http://site.pfaw.org/site/PageServer?pagename=issues_equality_prop_8_memo

Blaming Black Voters for Prop 8 Loss is Wrong and Destructive
Memo from Kathryn Kolbert, President, People For the American Way Foundation, to Progressive Allies and Journalists

Nov. 7 — The past 72 hours have brought an extraordinary range of emotions — great joy at the election of Barack Obama and defeat of John McCain, and sadness and anger at the passage of anti-gay initiatives in Florida, Arizona, Arkansas, and California. That sadness has turned to outrage at the speed with which some white gay activists began blaming African Americans — sometimes in appallingly racist ways — for the defeat of Proposition 8. This is inexcusable.

As a mother who has raised two children in a 30-year relationship with another woman, I fully understand the depth of hurt and anger at voters' rejection of our families' equality. But responding to that hurt by lashing out at African Americans is deeply wrong and offensive — not to mention destructive to the goal of advancing equality.

Before we give Religious Right leaders more reasons to rejoice by deepening the divisions they have worked so hard to create between African Americans and the broader progressive community, let's be clear about who is responsible for gay couples in California losing the right to get married, and let's think strategically about a way forward that broadens and strengthens support for equality.

Others have taken on the challenge of looking at the basic numbers and concluded that it is simply false to suggest that Prop 8 would have been defeated if African Americans had been more supportive. The amendment seems to have passed by more than half a million votes, and the number of black voters, even with turnout boosted by the presidential race, couldn't have made up that difference. That's an important fact, but when African American supporters of equality are being called racist epithets at protests about Prop 8, the numbers almost seem beside the point.

Republicans and white churchgoers, among many other groups, voted for Prop. 8 at higher rates than African Americans. There are few African Americans in the inland counties that all voted overwhelmingly to strip marriage equality out of the California constitution. So why single out African Americans? Who's really to blame? The Religious Right. Let's start here:

Conservative evangelical leaders who are unremittingly hostile to the rights of gay people and who put Prop. 8 on the ballot and bombarded pastors, churchgoers, and the public with lies about gay people wanting to destroy their religious liberty and come for their children — even suggesting that Christians would be thrown in jail if Prop 8 passed.

Mormon Church leaders who turned Prop. 8 into a national religious crusade against gay couples, badgered Mormons nationwide to give heavily to the campaign, and recruited thousands of footsoldiers for door-to-door canvassing (special kudos to the courageous Mormons who challenged the Church leadership)

Conservative Catholic leaders who betrayed Catholic teaching about human dignity by enthusiastically joining forces with campaign organizers who portrayed supporters of gay equality as evil and satanic

"Yes on Prop 8" leaders whose view of the campaign as a battle between good and evil led to an "ends justifies the means" campaign that included grossly distorted ads, mailings, and robocalls directed at African Americans and falsely portrayed Barack Obama as a Prop 8 supporter.

There will be plenty of post-game analysis of the No on 8 campaign's choices and strategies, and that's not the purpose of this memo. But it is clear that the Yes on 8 campaign had a far more aggressive and systematic outreach to African American religious leaders and voters. If we either take black voters for granted because they are "supposed to" be liberal, or we write them out of our campaign strategies because we label them inherently homophobic, we cannot turn around and make them the scapegoat for our failings.

Here's a fact that creates some perspective. On November 4 there was an anti-gay initiative on the ballot in Arkansas to prohibit unmarried couples from adopting or being foster parents. White voters supported that anti-gay initiative by a 16 percentage point margin, twice the margin for African Americans in the state. So it's clearly not the case that African Americans are inherently more prone to supporting discrimination than white Americans.

We need a broad and ongoing strategy to create and sustain constructive dialogue at the intersections of race, religion, sexuality, and politics. And it should go without saying that partnership is a two-way street. How many white LGBT leaders and activists have been at the forefront of battles to preserve affirmative action, or raise the minimum wage?
The Right's Big Investments Pay Big Dividends

The Religious Right has invested in systematic outreach to the most conservative elements of the Black Church, creating and promoting national spokespeople like Bishop Harry Jackson, and spreading the big lie that gays are out to destroy religious freedom and prevent pastors from preaching about homosexuality from the pulpit.

In addition, Religious Right leaders have exploited the discomfort among many African Americans with white gays who seem more ready to embrace the language and symbols of the civil rights movement than to be strong allies in the continuing battle for equal opportunity. At a series of Religious Right events, demagogic African American pastors have accused the gay rights movement of "hijacking" and "raping" the civil rights movement.

The effort to stir anti-gay emotions among African Americans by suggesting that gays are trying to "hijack" the civil rights movement is not new. During a Cincinnati referendum in 1993, anti-gay groups produced a videotape targeted to African American audiences; the tape featured Trent Lott, Ed Meese and other right-wing luminaries warning that protecting the civil rights of lesbians and gay men would come at the expense of civil rights gains made by the African American community. It was an astonishing act of hypocrisy for Lott and Meese to show concern for those civil rights gains, given their career-long hostility to civil rights principles and enforcement, but the strategy worked that year. Eleven years later, however, African American religious leaders and voters helped pass an initiative striking the anti-gay provision from the city charter. (The story of that successful fairness campaign is told in an award-winning mini-documentary — A Blinding Flash of the Obvious — that is part of a Focus on Fairness toolkit produced by People For the American Way Foundation.)

In California this year, national and local white anti-gay religious leaders worked hard to create alliances with African American clergy; Harry Jackson was busy in both California and Florida stirring opposition to marriage equality. None of the Right's outreach to African Americans on gay rights issues in recent years has been a secret. Neither has polling that showed some deterioration in African American support for full equality. But there hasn't been the same investment in systematic outreach from the gay rights community.
Support Champions, Don't Undermine Them

In the face of the Right's efforts to stir anti-gay sentiment among African Americans, many civil rights leaders have been powerful advocates for LGBT equality, among them Julian Bond, John Lewis, and the late Coretta Scott King. These leaders are deeply committed to the value of fairness and the constitutional principle of equality under the law, and they understand that strengthening the hand of far right leaders is not in any way in the interest of the African American community.

Angrily blaming African Americans for the passage of Prop 8 is not going to help open doors for the kind of long-term conversations we need to have about homophobia and discrimination. It will, instead, further isolate and undermine courageous African American leaders who have taken a firm stand for equality. Alice Huffman, president of the state NAACP, has been an outspoken champion on equality and on Prop 8, and right-wing leaders are fomenting attacks on her from within the organization. People like Alice Huffman need our support and strategic thinking, not complaints or condemnation.

Broad-brush denunciation of African Americans by white gay leaders also fosters the incredibly damaging perception that the LGBT and African American communities are two separate, rather than overlapping entities, and undermines the work of African American LGBT leaders.
Religion, Homophobia and Marriage Equality

The far right has aggressively sought to use traditional religious beliefs about homosexuality as a wedge to separate African Americans from progressive allies and particularly from the LGBT rights movement. In response, People For the American Way Foundation's African American Ministers Leadership Council has created an Equal Justice Task Force and made a commitment to a multi-year effort to take on homophobia in the black church and broader African American community.

As part of that long-term campaign, People For the American Way Foundation conducted focus groups among African American churchgoers in California in September. Among men and women, and among younger and older groups, we found strong opposition to discrimination against LGBT people in employment and housing. And we found widespread support for legal protections for committed couples. Among all groups there was generally a live-and-let-live attitude toward gay people in their communities and congregations, and a recognition that couples deserve some basic legal protections. People For the American Way Foundation produced and ran three radio ads designed to tap that instinct for fairness and encouraging African Americans to oppose anti-gay discrimination.

But our focus groups also showed us that marriage equality faces a higher hurdle. Many people in our focus groups had difficulty sorting out the difference between civil marriage and marriage as a religious institution. Even some of the most eloquent opponents of discrimination argued that marriage was somehow different because they saw it as an inherently religious act that God had designed to be between a man and a woman. Rev. Kenneth Samuel, chair of the AAMLC's Equal Justice Task Force, says we need to be in "tough and loving" conversation to get people to think differently about that question, and to grapple with separating religious belief from commitment to constitutional principles of equality under the law. That's a hard conversation to have in the midst of a heated political campaign.

Samuel was among the leaders of workshops at the California NAACP convention in October on homophobia in the black church. The overflow sessions went on for hours, demonstrating that there is a real hunger for the kind of honest, rousing conversation about homophobia, discrimination, love, equality, scripture, and politics. People's hearts were changed, even if everyone didn't end the session ready to fully embrace marriage equality.

As an outgrowth of those workshops, Rev. Gerald Johnson, the Individual Rights and Advocacy Vice Chair of the state NAACP, asked for volunteers to develop and submit a resolution that resolved to: "develop partnerships with African American civic and religious leaders to educate, train, and advocate for cultural competency and sensitivity in the greater African American community as it relates to gay and lesbian concerns." That resolution passed overwhelmingly.

In preparation for those workshops and other clergy roundtables and training sessions, People For the American Way Foundation created a video documenting right-wing efforts to co-opt the black church by embracing and lifting up the voices of anti-gay conservative black clergy. In that video, Rev. Samuel describes Religious Right leaders who believe welfare is satanic and the minimum wage and other worker protections are ungodly, and he asks, "what are the consequences of lending our voices, our moral and spiritual authority, to those who seek our support to deny the dignity, humanity, and equality of our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters?"

Rev. Samuel speaks movingly about the religious journey that led him to begin preaching a gospel of inclusion — and his commitment to stick with it even when a thousand members left his church. He understands how deeply questions of homophobia and marriage are rooted in understandings of scripture and the traditions of the black church. Here's how Rev. Samuel concludes that video:

I know that within the Black Church we have different theological views about sexuality. But I believe we can find common ground against mistreating our brothers and sisters in the words of Jesus to love our neighbors as ourselves. And we can find common ground in opposing discrimination in the constitutional principle of equal justice under the law that we fought so hard to make a reality.

I believe the Black Church loses a bit of its soul every time we sacrifice the well-being of our gay brothers and sisters — every time we make political alliances at their expense. I believe it is our calling to be a consistent voice for justice. And I do believe that "A threat to justice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere."

The LGBT-equality movement needs to recognize that its real enemies are the Religious Right organizations and leaders who oppose gay and lesbian equality and who devise and fund strategies like Prop 8. And we must commit now to building long-term partnerships with equality-affirming African American clergy and community leaders that will allow us to advance the progressive values that we share.

Nadine Smith

Equality Florida

954-394-4980

Joseph Lieberman (R) Future?

2008-11-08T09:56:00.002-05:00

Not only did he cheer lead for the war Iraq and even sponsor the Iraq War Resolution, he voiced support for Alberto Gonzales' infamous torture memo and was one of the Gang of 14 who eased the way for confirmation of Bush's conservative judicial nominees.

After losing the Democratic primary in 2006, he ran against his party's nominee, Ned Lamont, to retain his Senate seat as an "Independent." And he has campaigned as Republican John McCain's shadow for nearly a full year, saying point blank that the election was a choice "between one candidate, John McCain, who has always put the country first, worked across party lines to get things done, and one candidate who has not." That treachery, despite Obama's support for Lieberman in the contentious 2006 Senate primary contest.

What now? Lieberman says now he is for bipartisanship.

Isn't he forgetting, he is no longer of either party?

* * *

Lieberman in talks about caucusing with Senate GOP

Video: Sen. Joe Lieberman Mum on Future With Democrats

Joe Lieberman's fate to be determined

Will Reid Toss Lieberman?

Source:
http://Buzzflash.com

954-394-4980

An American Moment: Our Story

2008-11-07T12:36:00.002-05:00

Start right now. Tell Obama your story in your own words about what this campaign and this election means to you. Share your hopes for an Obama Administration and a government for the people.

http://change.gov/page/s/yourstory

954-394-4980

Election Predictions: Pundits Weigh In

2008-11-03T22:05:00.001-05:00

Electoral College, Senate Seat, and House Seat predictions

read more | digg story

Is Mason-Dixon Running A Scam O America?

2008-11-02T13:21:00.002-05:00

State polling from Mason-Dixon provides a terrific working example of what we call "house effects" -- a poll's consistent tendency to lean toward one candidate or another. Throughout this election cycle, we have found that Mason-Dixon's polls lean 2-3 points more toward John McCain than the average of other polls taken in those states at the same time.

Here are the Mason-Dixon polls released within the past 72 hours in eight key battleground states, along with a comparison to our current trendline-adjusted averages:

In all of these states but Florida, Mason-Dixon came in below our average (although in some cases not by much). On balance, their polls were 2.5 points more favorable to McCain than the average -- exactly where our model had pegged Mason-Dixon polls going in.

But! -- you might protest -- maybe these numbers are more favorable to McCain because your averages are out of date, and this election is trending toward McCain!

Well, not really. Because if you compare these polls against the last time Mason-Dixon was in the field in these states, Obama hasn't really lost any ground. (Actually, he's gained a bit, but not any statistically significant amount).

...to make this clear for the nth time, the presence of a house effect does not mean that a pollster is partisan or "biased". Mason-Dixon is a non-partisan pollster. Nor does it mean that a pollster is wrong! Mason-Dixon has a pretty good track record. Their vision of the electorate -- which seems to point toward a narrow Obama electoral victory -- could very easily turn out to be the right one. But it does mean that you need to take these sorts of things into account to make sure that you're making apples-to-apples comparisons.

954-394-4980

Joe The Plumber Throws McCain Under The Bus

2008-10-30T11:31:00.003-04:00

McCain was in Ohio today - home of Joe the Plumber, John McCain's running mate for the last two weeks. McCain just threw a shout out to Joe, who was supposed to be there today. Well:

- did someone get stood up? When Sarah Palin was in Ohio yesterday, Joe was there. Even Joe the Plumber gets that McCain is finished.

Maybe Joe was meeting with his PR team trying to get his country music deal. No matter, even Joe the Plumber has gotten what he can out of John McCain.

UPDATE:
The McCain campaign actually had to bus in school kids from the surrounding area in order to fill the event. As reported by MSNBC:

A local school district official confirmed after the event that of the 6,000 people estimated by the fire marshal to be in attendance this morning, more than 4,000 were bused in from schools in the area. The entire 2,500-student Defiance School District was in attendance, the official said, in addition to at least three other schools from neighboring districts, one of which sent 14 buses.

954-394-4980

Prominent Republicans Endorsing Obama

2008-10-29T14:22:00.002-04:00

Former Republican Governor of Massachusetts William Weld
Former Rhode Island Senator Lincoln Chafee
Former Republican Governor of Minnesota Arne Carlson
Former Iowa Congressman Jim Leach
Wayne Gilchrest, Congressman from Maryland
Larry Pressler, Former Senator from South Dakota
Lowell Weicker, Former Governor and Senator from Connecticut
Richard Riordan, Former Mayor of Los Angeles
Jim Whitaker, Fairbanks, Alaska Mayor
Linwood Holton, Former Governor of Virginia
Colin Powell, Former Secretary of State
Douglas Kmiec, Head of the Office of Legal Counsel under Reagan & Bush (41)
Charles Fried, Solictor General of the United States under Reagan
Jackson M. Andrews, Republican Counsel to the United States Senate
Susan Eisenhower, Granddaughter of President Eisenhower and President of the Eisenhower Group
Francis Fukuyama, Advisor to President Reagan
Rita Hauser, Member of President Bush's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board
Larry Hunter, Former President Reagan Policy Advisor
Bill Ruckelshaus, served in the Nixon and Reagan Administrations
Scott McClellan, Former Press Secretary to President Bush (43)
Ken Adelman
Jeffrey Hart, National Review Senior Editor
Wick Alison, Former Publisher of the National Review
Christopher Buckley, Son of National Review Founder William F. Buckley and former National Review columnist
Michael Smerconish, Columnist for The Philadelphia Inquirer
C.C. Goldwater, Granddaughter of Barry Goldwater

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2008/10/24/obamacans-prominent-republicans-line-up-behind-obama/ Wall Street Journal

http://www.republicansforobama.org/?q=node/3341

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/08/13/opinion/main4347525.shtml

Also: http://features.csmonitor.com/politics/2008/10/24/more-republicans-jump-ship-weld-mcclellan-support-obama/

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/01/AR2008020102621.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/cc-goldwater/why-mccain-has-lost-our-v_b_137150.html

954-394-4980

Former GOP Senator Backs Obama

2008-10-27T10:30:00.002-04:00

Former Sen. Larry Pressler (R-SD), "who was the first Vietnam veteran to serve in the United States Senate, is the latest Republican to back Sen. Barack Obama's presidential campaign," according to Politico.

"I just got the feeling that Obama will be able to handle this financial crisis better, and I like his financial team of [former Treasury Secretary Robert] Rubin and [former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul] Volcker better," he said. By contrast, John McCain's "handling of the financial crisis made me feel nervous."

954-394-4980