EXPOSING JOHN KLINE AND THE DEVIOUS TACTICS OF THE MOST "OUT OF WHACK" REPUBLICAN IN THE COUNTRY

-by Coleen Rowley

"Out of Whackness" is the highly appropriate term that the "Swing State Project" has come up with identifying Republican incumbents who should theoretically be extra vulnerable in a general election based on comparisons between their PVI and their voting record. The article describes them as "the wingnuts hiding in moderate districts." Based on that criteria, our Minnesota CD-2 Congressman John Kline is the most out of whack Republican in the country.

This designation will come as no surprise to Kline's constituents. When first elected, Kline positively crowed about representing George Bush's interests rather than those of his district. His previous position as Vice President of the neo-con inspired “Center of the American Experiment” (Minnesota’s own right-wing think tank), apparently cued him to the need to “finish the job” in Iraq. He already shared Bush’s enthusiasm for expanding the list of countries-- most having no connections to 9-11-- that the U.S. should go to war with. And his answer to: The War on Terror: How Will We Know When the War Is Over? was very much in sync with John McCain’s idea-- give it another 100 years.

As Bush's stock declined nationwide, Kline stopped crowing but his voting record remains 90+ percent lockstep with Bush-Cheney and the GOP. Kline is so partisan that in 2006 he told a group of disabled veterans that he wouldn't support a veterans' benefits bill simply because it was written by a Democrat.

A moderate Republican leader in Minnesota such as former Senator Dave Durenberger has even begun to criticize Kline for his misleading partisan stance on the energy crisis that serves only to enrich fossil fuel producers and auto makers.

But after unsuccessfully stumping for Bush’s plan to privatize Social Security in early 2005, Kline realized that he should no longer broadcast his partisanship. So now he does all he can to keep a low profile in the district. In early 2007, a group of Kline's constituents had to make six trips to Kline's office over the course of two months before he agreed to hold a public town-hall meeting. And even then, it's unlikely the town hall would have occurred but for the fact that Kline suffered some bad press for calling the police on his own district residents. When the people of his district came to his office asking him to do his job, his first instinct was to try to intimidate them with a police presence. Only because a committed group of his constituents refused to back down, did that one town hall meeting take place. Since then, Kline has only held 'tele-town hall' meetings on the phone, where he has complete control over who participates.

So how does one so "out of whack" as Kline keep his seat? First, try to never let any hard questions (like this one) be asked. Never furnish any information about issues or positions on a website or otherwise. (Kline's campaign website in 2006 consisted of only a few general paragraphs.) Don’t hold public meetings. Don't debate congressional challengers. (Kline even refused to supply answers to local newspaper voters' guides prior to the 2006 election.) DO take big money from special interests-- Kline obtained over $600,000 from PACs alone before the 2006 election which gave him almost $1.5 million total to use for negative ad campaigns produced by Rove protégées. Paint oneself as a hero. (The positive portion of Kline's ads in his five previous campaigns all revolved around a couple of photos showing him carrying the "nuclear football" for Ronald Reagan.)

And since 2006, the politician's dream come true: conduct lots of "Tele-Town Hall" robo calling into the district at taxpayer expense. The "Tele-Town Hall" developed by Rodney A. Smith, a former Republican national finance director, was pioneered by Kline and a half-dozen other Republicans in the lead-up to the 2006 elections. It worked so well for them that over a hundred Republicans are now employing this manipulative technology. Just like the screening and scripting that goes into Rush Limbaugh's radio show in terms of ability to pre-screen callers, plant questions, conduct push polls and other subtle campaign ploys and, the best part, it's ALL AT TAXPAYER EXPENSE! Tele-town hall robo calling substitutes for real constituent interaction and has become the foremost tool used to keep "out of whack" Republican incumbents in power.


Although they maintain equally right-wing voting records in terms of being Bush enablers, Kline even beats the truly whacky Michele Bachmann by a few spots for "out of whackness." In Bachmann, Kline has found an eager protege: substituting the "Tele-Town" robo calls for public meetings and turning down all public forum opportunities when you can't control the questions. (Last year, for instance the Humphrey Institute was able to host individual question and answer public policy forums with each of the Minnesota congresspersons and senators except for Kline, Bachmann and one other.)

The challenge is quite clear for Democrat Steve Sarvi, who recently was endorsed by Minnesota’s Democratic Farmer Labor Party to run against Kline. Sarvi is a great candidate. Unlike Kline and Bush, he’s reality based, with real experience on the ground in Iraq (as a Minnesota National Guard member) as well as considerable experience in city management in Minnesota. And Kline’s “out of whackness” does make him potentially vulnerable. But Kline still has the big money advantage given to him from corporate interests as well as the unique access, as an incumbent, to the taxpayer-funded robo-calling system that is said to substitute for real town hall meetings. Sarvi will therefore need to get Kline to answer questions in a public way either by debating or through newspaper forums, or via another real Town Hall meeting. In April 2007 Kline actually promised he would hold another public meeting in a few months. But that was over a year ago, and he's not kept his word. He’s probably hoping no one remembers that promise. Kline’s probably hoping voters only remember the ad about him being the hero who carried the nuclear football for Ronald Reagan. He has to hope that he's beat down the dream of democracy in this district via Rodney Smith's little black robo-calling box so that he never has to ever face constitutents' hard questions ever again. If Sarvi wants to send this out of whack Republican back to Texas, he must remind people what real democracy and real electoral representation is supposed to be.

BLUE AMERICAN WELCOMES BACK OUR OLD FRIEND LARRY KISSELL

Larry campaigning with John Edwards

Larry Kissell was a big fave around Blue America in 2006 and he came closer to winning than any of our candidates who didn't actually displace a Republican incumbent. You might want to go back and read the archive of his first visit to FDL in June, 2006. This year he's far better known in his district-- and the Republican brand has turned to... well, you know.

Yesterday, Larry's campaign manager, Leanne Powell, told me that Bush will be visiting the district. We asked her if she could get Larry to take some time out of his campaign and update us a bit on his campaign. So... this evening at 6pm (est) we're welcoming Larry Kissell back to Firedoglake. I hope you can come over and talk to him about what's on your mind. He sent us this:

Tomorrow, George Bush will be in my District at Fort Bragg in a last ditch effort to sell his failed Iraq policy and save his favorite rubber stamp in Congress, my opponent Robin Hayes. With your help, we're going to send them both a Reality Check. I'm thrilled to be kicking off our 24-hour Rally for Reality here with my Blue America friends on Fire Dog Lake, and look forward to hearing your concerns and answering your questions. From the very beginning, you've stood with this campaign, and that's why it will be my honor and privilege to stand up for you in Congress and finally replace the man that said this on CNN:

"Saddam Hussein and people like him were very much involved in 9/11," Rep. Robin Hayes said. Told no investigation had ever found evidence to link Saddam and 9/11, Hayes responded, "I'm sorry, but you must have looked in the wrong places." (CNN, June 29, 2005)

The reality is that Robin Hayes and people like him are very much involved in our failing economy, environment, healthcare system, education system and foreign policy. Facts are stubborn things, and no friend to Robin Hayes and George Bush. I want to make real Representation a reality once again.

I can't wait to find out if Robin Hayes will dare appear on TV with George Bush. If you'd like to help Larry overcome the avalanche of corporate donations that have been flowing into Hayes' campaign, please consider visiting our Blue America ActBlue page.

DOUBLE TALK EXPRESS HAS A MAJOR PROBLEM WITH LOBBYSTS

Actually, they have two major problems with lobbyists. The first and most obvious one is that over 100 crooked, sleazy lobbyists are working for the McCain campaign, sucking up money for the candidate who they have every reason to know will serve the interests of their corporate clients rather than the interests of everyday Americans. Fire The Lobbyists has a cure new video clip up today that summarizes this aspect of McCain's lobbyist problem:



McCain and his disgraceful relationships with the very bottom of the barrel of the Washington lobbyists-- many of whom lobby on behalf of foreign governments-- is finally starting to make it into the mainstream media, although it will probably take another few weeks before TV "news" picks up on it. It's ironic that McCain has been running around like a chicken without a head squawking about how Obama would "appease" foreign dictators when it looks like millions and millions of dollars are being funneled into McCain's campaign from every fascist dictatorship on the planet-- via his and their mutual employees-- especially the Saudis, the junta in Myanmar, Russia, China and at least a dozen other countries. One of McCain's two top staffers, lowlife sleazebag lobbyist Charlie Black, seems to be acting as a funnel for massive amounts of money from the Russian Mafia to McCain. McCain knows better than to have people like this around him, let alone driving the bus! But does he care?

Meanwhile, the other lobbyist problem is that the lobbyists don't think McCain, is willing to toss some of them off-- and under-- the bus to save his own ass... and they're getting angry.

Five lobbyists have been shown the door of McCain’s Virginia campaign headquarters in the past week, including Tom Loeffler, who is largely credited with keeping the senator’s primary campaign financially afloat long enough to capture the Republican presidential nomination.

“If it was OK to have these people working for you in February, why is it not OK today?” asked one Republican lobbyist who counts a friend among the new McCain outcast class.

The timing, motivation and even the details of the policy itself all are the subject of debates and consternation this week at water coolers, in restaurants and on conference calls on K Street.

“McCain’s self-righteous [expletive] has caught up with him. Now he’s got himself in a jam,” said another Republican lobbyist who asked to remain anonymous because he is a campaign volunteer. “He’s got to change the subject back to economic growth and taxation and the war on terror.”

And there’s this thought from another McCain supporter: “I find it a little offensive. It was good enough to get my $2,300 donation. If we’re not good enough, then send my check back. It pisses me off.”

The irony of this is that, despite the connivance of the corporate media-- particularly of shills like David Broder and Chris Matthews-- to create an image of McCain as "Mr. Clean," his entire career in politics-- from Day One-- has always been marked by gross corruption beyond even acceptable Washington standards. McCain has always been corrupt and always attempted to hide under a patina of being an ethics champion, even persuading Russ Feingold to let him sponsor Feingold's reform legislation and have his name on it first.

Senatorial courtesy has prevented most members of the Senate from calling McCain out on his outrageous behavior. I was really happy to see Obama finally calling a spade a spade today-- and exposing McCain's little charade-- while he was campaigning in Tampa:

"Now, we need a president who sees the government not as a tool to enrich friends and high-priced lobbyists, but as the defender of fairness and opportunity for every American. And let me be fair about this. Now, John McCain has agreed with me on some of the steps we need to make our government more ethical and accountable. Almost a decade ago, he offered a bill that, in his words, would ban a candidate from paying registered lobbyists. Let me repeat that. This-- ten years ago, John McCain offered a bill that said he would ban a candidate from paying registered lobbyists. And he did this because he said that having lobbyists on your campaign was a conflict of interest. This is what he said ten years ago.

"Well, I'll tell you that John McCain then would be pretty disappointed with John McCain now, because he hired some of the biggest lobbyists in Washington to run his campaign. And when he was called on it, his top lobbyists actually had the nerve to say, 'The American people won't care about this.' Well, I think the American people do care about it and I know they have a clear choice in this election: we can either have a election in which we are taking on the root causes of special interests dominated politics in Washington or we can ignore the problem and we can wake up four years from now and still be talking about an energy crisis and still be talking about a health care crisis and still be talking about a tax code that's not fair to you. I don't want to wake up that way, neither do you. That's a choice we've got in this election. We're going to change how politics is done in Washington."

REPUBLICANS AND THEIR CLUELESS ALLIES STILL HOPING FOR MODERATE LOSSES IN NOVEMBER

Not all the forces of reaction reside within the Republican Party, nor even just within the Republican Party and it's Democratic subsidiaries, the DLC and Blue Dogs. A few days ago I was attracted to another story about the disarray in the Republican congressional caucuses and about how they would lose more seats in November. But it didn't take more than a few paragraphs to see where the spin was coming from-- and going. First came the laughably conservative predictions from forecasters who are never, never, never correct (identified, of course as "the three most authoritative nonpartisan voices on congressional races"). "They all predict that Democrats will add to their majorities in the House by six to 20 seats and in the Senate by two to five seats." This is as ridiculously lowballing it as these three clowns do every year.

Senate seats, currently held by Republicans, expected to go Democratic for sure or be in play until the last minute:

Virginia
New Hampshire
Colorado
New Mexico
Alaska
Maine
Oregon
Minnesota
Oklahoma
Mississippi
Texas
North Carolina

The Republicans will probably be more successful in defending challenges in:

Georgia
Kansas
Tennessee
Kentucky
Idaho
Nebraska

And 6 to 20 seats in the House? The total will be closer to 40 than to 20 and, indeed, these 3 hacks cover their asses by adding (as always) that "the swing could be larger, but none expect the Democrats to gain enough to be able to push legislation past a Republican filibuster in the Senate or a presidential veto in either chamber." None? Really?

But the real purpose of the story came next:

It's also possible that some of the Democratic gains could come with the election of moderate to conservative candidates-- as happened on Tuesday in Mississippi. That would mean that a Democratic president-- Illinois Sen. Barack Obama or New York Sen. Hillary Clinton--  might have a hard time getting even a Democratic Congress to approve all of their proposals on such issues as health care and taxes.

"Obama can propose new programs by the dozen, but odds are the Congress won't go along with most of them," said Sabato. "There will be enough moderates in both the House and Senate to force a new president to compromise."

Utterly clueless, especially in its assumption that Obama is somehow not "moderate" and that Democrats likely to win will be conservatives. Let's look at the dozen Senate races the Democrats are most likely to win. In Virginia, Mark Warner is a mainstream Democrat very much like Obama. Same for Jeanne Shaheen in New Hampshire, Ronnie Musgrove of Mississippi, and Mark Udall in Colorado. Tom Udall (NM) is also a mainstream Democrat though more progressive on many issues than Obama, as are Mark Begich of Alaska, Tom Allen of Maine, Jeff Merkley of Oregon, Al Franken of Minnesota, Rick Noriega of Texas, and Andrew Rice of Oklahoma.  The only actual conservative Dem with a chance to win is Kay Hagen in North Carolina but her corporatist approach will probably doom her campaign as badly as even further right Bruce Lunsford's (KY) will doom his.

And in the House, there are plenty of populists and progressives likely to beat GOP challengers from Darcy Burner (WA), Eric Massa (NY), Mark Schauer (MI) Martin Heinrich (NM), Larry Kissell (NC), Jim Himes (CT), Victoria Wulsin (OH), Gary Peters (MI), Dennis Shulman (NJ)... and then there are the progressive Democrats like Donna Edwards replacing right-of-center Establishment and corporatist hacks like Al Wynn. Fast approaching primaries will tell us if the same scenarios will play out in Georgia (where Regina Thomas is taking on far right Democrat John Barrow) and Iowa, where Ed Fallon hopes to bring the disgraceful career of Blue Dog shill Leonard Boswell to a close).

CAN YOU REMEMBER WHEN YOU FIRST REALIZED WHAT LIEBERMAN WAS?

If you're wondering how Holy Joe Lieberman will try to outdo Zell Miller in his treachery towards Democrats when he shills for his BBF John McCain at the Republican National Convention this summer, you can see a preview of his speech in today's Wall Street Journal. There's nothing new here, just the same old GOP talking points Lieberman has been spouting since he first fell in love with Bush's Neocon foreign policy. Basically, McCain is counting on Lieberman as an anti-Obama attack dog who will paint the Democratic Party as a force for appeasement and weak on foreign policy.

One has to wonder, though, how strong the Senate Democratic leadership is, if they are willing to put up with Lieberman. Well, don't fret. I have it on good authority that they are eager to loss him out of the caucus as soon as the new Senate is seated in January. Lieberman is hoping, bizarrely and increasingly unrealistically, for a McCain victory and a cabinet position.

It's funny-- reactionary Blue Dog Leonard Boswell (IA) is attacking his progressive opponent Ed Fallon for abandoning the Democratic Party in 2000 because he voted for Ralph Nader. Forget for a moment that Boswell's voting record shows that he abandons the Democratic Party systematically every day to rubber stamp the worst of the Bush-Cheney agenda. I've only written one letter to the L.A. Times in my life-- and it was published. In it I explained why I had decided I could not vote for Al Gore for president. My reason was exactly the same as Ed Fallon's: Joe Lieberman. And this is long before the Iraq War was more than a glimmer in the eyes of the Neocon warmongers! Since then, Lieberman has gotten exponentially worse and worse as he builds to the ultimate disgrace of the speech he is planning for Minneapolis.

It will be with great joy to watch Democratic senators do what Ed Fallon and I have done long ago and what Connecticult Democrats did in 2006. It's a shame the Democrats still lend Lieberman credibility with lies like how he's such a wonderful Democrat on everything but Iraq. That's always been false. Lieberman has a miserable voting record across the board. He votes with the GOP on substantive matters more than any Democrats other than arch-reactionary Ben Nelson (NE) and two Dixiecrats, Mary Landrieu (LA) and Mark Pryor (AR). Particularly when it comes to advancing Bush's worst choices for lifetime appointments to the judiciary, Lieberman is always working hard to make sure they win confirmation. The Republicans are likely to lose as many as a dozen seats in the U.S. Senate in November but they can count on picking up one in January, when Holy Joe Lieberman crosses the aisle to sit, permanently, with the custodians of every idea and value loathed by his professed heroes, trading in FDR, Harry Truman and JFK for someone only as deceptive and manipulative as Lieberman would compare to the liked of John McCain, Lindsey Graham and James Inhofe.

Anyway, in honor of Holy Joe's jihad against America, how about a reprise of an old Flamingos classic?



UPDATE: AT LEAST OBAMA HAS STOPPED GIVING LIEBERMAN A FREE RIDE!

Obama Communications Director Robert Gibbs:

I have to admit, I haven't read the whole piece because what dawned on me about two paragraphs into the piece is that Joe Lieberman would be a fabulous secretary of state for John McCain for one reason and one reason only. What Joe Lieberman proposes and what John McCain proposes is another four years of George Bush's foreign policy. We talked about how concerned we are and rightly so about Iran but what we have done is strengthen Iran by invading Iraq in a horrible, misguided war that Joe Lieberman signed off on, that John McCain signed off on, and that George Bush was happy to wage. That’s not kind of foreign policy we need, it’s not what’s going to make us safer.

Every Democrat in the Senate should sign off on that, especially serial Lieberman-backers like Pryor, Nelson, and Landrieu.

ANOTHER TOP McCAIN OPERATIVE LEAVES THE CAMPAIGN-- BUT NOT IN DISGRACE LIKE THE REST OF THEM

McCain's campaign is almost losing as many Republicans as the House caucus. After a whole gaggle of crooked lobbyists were exposed by the media and asked to leave the Double Talk Express, one of the few decent operatives McCain has had around him, Mark McKinnon, jumped ship yesterday.

In telling the Cox News Service last June that he would not work against an Obama candidacy, Mr. McKinnon had said that Mr. Obama’s election to the presidency “would send a great message to the country and the world.” In that interview, Mr. McKinnon had said that he had policy differences with Mr. Obama, especially on Iraq, and that he believed Mr. McCain was best suited for the presidency because of his national security positions. But, he added, “I just don’t want to work against an Obama candidacy.”

There has been a great deal of speculation-- confirmed by sources inside the bus-- that McKinnon was sickened by the vicious, racist GOP game plan McCain approved to deploy against Obama and that was the reason he refused to work for his old friend. "Mr. McKinnon had told friends, and some journalists, that he did not want to be part of a hard-fought campaign against such a historic candidacy. In his interview with Cox, he had said of Mr. Obama: 'I think he has a deep character and good judgment. I also think he’s wrong on some fundamental issues. But I believe he is honest and independent.'”

KENTUCKY AND OREGON RESULTS-- PLUS CLAY COUNTY

When I woke up this morning CNN had a little feature of Clay County, Kentucky. I was only half-awake so I don't recall exactly how many people they interviewed but I'd guess that-- apart from the normal-looking mayor or Manchester, there wasn't a full set of teeth between at least half a dozen people. I'm usually sympathetic when I see a place mired in poverty and misfortune-- and, although Clay County is mired in both, sympathy isn't what the CNN report drew out of me. I'll explain in a minute but let me give you some of the facts first. Clay County is the poorest county in Kentucky and the 18th poorest in America, most of the poorer ones being desolate Indian reservations. The per capita income is $9,716.00. As of the last census the population was 24,556, of whom around 15,000 are registered to vote-- 13,092 Republicans and 2,013 Democrats. That's right. Clay County, dirt poor, rampant unemployment and it's overwhelming Republican.

The county is also 94% white and 40% are living below the poverty line. Early this morning CNN was making the point that there was scant interest in today's election in Clay County. Today 649 Democrats voted (32%) and 2,569 Republicans voted (19.6%). Hillary took 85% of the Democratic vote and McCain took 74% of the Republican vote. On the Senate side Lunsford got 48.5% of the Democratic vote and Greg Fischer got 26.2%.

The first and the last person they interviewed was a kind of elderly obese woman sitting in a cheap restaurant sharing her tales of woe. At the end the reporter asked her what she thought about Hillary Clinton. She started shouting about the Bible and how a woman's place is in the home.

That said, Kentucky Democrats gave a corrupt Zell Miller type quasi-Democrat, Bruce Lunsford, their nomination for the U.S. Senate, virtually guaranteeing another term for an even more reactionary and more corrupt Mitch McConnell. Statewide 459,093 (65.5%) voted for Hillary and 209,869 voted for Obama (30%). On the GOP side, McCain took 142,836 (72.5%) and the runner-up was Huckabee with 16,367 (8.3%). Obama, in losing to Hillary, took more votes than all the Republicans combined.

In Oregon we were following several races but let's get the presidential race out of the way. As expected, Obama won. With 50% of the returns counted, Hillary took a few remote counties but Obama won all the big ones for a 58%-42% win. He took 9 delegates to her 2. Tomorrow's NY Times: "Under the rules used by Democrats, Mr. Obama’s showing in Kentucky and his victory in Oregon appear to be enough to allow him to secure a majority of the delegates up for grabs in primaries and caucuses." And it looks like Senator Chuck Hagel will be the Republican foil for the treacherous Joe Lieberman expected to transform himself into Zell Miller at the GOP Hate Fest this summer. "The Republican Senator from Nebraska was a political thorn in McCain's side on Tuesday night, repeatedly lavishing praise on the presumptive Democratic candidate and levying major foreign policy criticisms at the GOP nominee and the Republican Party as a whole. At one point, Hagel even urged the Arizona Republican to elevate his campaign discourse to a higher, more honest level."

It looks like Jeff Merkley beat Steve Novick 45-41%. Blue America will have Jeff on at FED Thursday evening. But my favorite race of the night was for the useless right to represent the GOP in the congressional race in OR-05 (to fill the seat of retiring Democrat Darlene Hooley). Mike Erickson, after being exposed as a coke freak and pervert, beat the favorite, Kevin Mannix. Erickson is expected to lose to Kurt Schrader in November.

Watch Obama's speech tonight in Des Moines:




UPDATE: OREGON GOP CIVIL WAR

Loser Kevin Mannix has refused to endorse the coke sniffing abortion practioner Mike Erickson (backed by the Oregon anti-choice loons). "I cannot support a dishonest man," he said. No word on how he plans to handle McCain's candidacy.

WHAT HAPPENS IF THE REPUBLICANS LOSE OKLAHOMA... AND MISSISSIPPI?

I don't mean to make anyone crazy but it's hard to get the 1936 election out of my head. After the voting was finished, only 88 Republicans were left in the House (20%) and the GOP obstructionists could claim only 16 Senators. It may take a few cycles to attain such sterling results but we seem to be well on our way.

I've long felt that the absolute last firewall for the Republicans before they start jumping off buildings-- or switching parties-- would be in Oklahoma, where the Democrats are fielding an exceptional strong and compelling candidate in state Senator Andrew Rice for a seat currently held by lunatic fringe extremist Jim Inhofe, the incumbent with the most reactionary over-all voting record of anyone up for re-election in November. Oklahoma has been a right-wing hotbed for some time and Bush took the state in 2004 with 66% of the vote, one of the highest tallies he got anywhere. The last time Inhofe ran (2002), he took 57% of the vote and the state's congressional lineup includes 4 right-wing Republicans and one right-wing Democrat who votes with them very frequently. On the other hand, the last time SUSA checked, Bush had an approval rating of only 39% in Oklahoma and 59% were not satisfied with how he's doing his job. On top of that, mainstream Democrat Brad Henry won the governor's chair in 2006 with 67% of the vote-- to a paltry 33% for typical right-wing extremist Congressman Ernest Istook, a virtual indistinguishable doppelganger to Inhofe.

This morning, though, I noticed that another redder than red state may be teetering. Everyone knows that Democrat Travis Childers defeated garden variety GOP wingnut Gary Davis in a heavily Republican congressional district last week. Even though it was patently false, everyone in the district believed, courtesy of the GOP and some shady Republican front groups, that Childers was handpicked to run by Barack Obama and Jeremiah Wright. And they elected him anyway. That still didn't prepare me for what I read today. The wingnut Davis was seeking to replace, Roger Wicker, had been appointed to the U.S. Senate when Trent Lott finally admitted he was nothing but a lobbyist and moved from the Capitol to K Street. The latest polling numbers indicate that Wicker should enjoy his few months in the Senate since they are likely to be his last. "Former governor Ronnie Musgrove leads appointed Senator Roger Wicker by 8 points, 48% to 40%, in the Mississippi Senate race to fill former Senator Trent Lott's seat, according to a new poll conducted for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee. Musgrove is viewed favorably by 57% of the state's voters, compared to 30% who view him unfavorably." A DSCC spokesman added that "With gas prices out of control, Mississippians are tired of Roger Wicker taking thousands of dollars from the oil and gas industry and then showering them with billions of dollars in special tax subsidies." Good point. And pretty much as close to 1936 as the Republicans are going to get in 2008.


UPDATE: OH... AND IT'S GRIM OVER ON THE HOUSE SIDE TOO

Although Boehner has failed in his bid to oust Tom Cole from the NRCC-- Republicans are too paralyzed with fear and confusion to do anything but march to their miserable individual demises. today's Hill is reporting that some whackadoodle right wing bloggers-- the kind who are inspired by Ann Coulter, Bill O'Reilly, James Dobson and Rush Limbaugh-- are campaigning to replace poor old Cole.

“[Republicans] can continue on this course until November and embrace disaster,” wrote the directors of RedState, a leading conservative blog, “or they can clean house and bring a new direction to the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC).”

That new direction includes a new NRCC chairman and a commitment to an anti-earmark pledge, they wrote last week, after Democrat Travis Childers won in a special election the Mississippi seat held by Republicans for three decades.

The bloggers also write that Cole and other Republican leaders haven’t stressed enough the need to play to the party’s base, especially on fiscal matters, which they think is crucial to holding off Democratic gains.

Only if they concentrated on reducing earmarks would they be able to rally the activists who could reverse Republican fortunes, according to RedState’s editor, Erick Erickson.

...Activists aren’t calling for just Cole’s head. Erickson wants “bloody purges” in the Republican Conference of members such as Rep. Don Young (Alaska), whom Erickson calls an “earmarxist” for having secured millions in federal funds for projects such as the so-called Bridge to Nowhere in Alaska and the Coconut Road highway in Florida.

I love the idea of the GOP House caucus getting together and roasting Don Young and Jerry Lewis on spits over open fires. I hope it's televised. And then they can embrace Bush even closer, back McCain's call for 100 years of war, spend millions of more dollars on racist ads about their icon Jeremiah Wright, run against gays, choice and abstinence. Now there's the platform that will guarantee them that 88 seats they deserve.

WARRANTLESS WIRETAPS AND RETROACTIVE IMMUNITY ARE UNAMERICAN

Earlier today we mentioned that a campaign to hold accountable wayward Democrats who vote with the Republicans to stomp on the Constitution is about to commence. Readers of Crooks & Liars, Firedoglake, Digby, Salon and DownWithTyranny had an opportunity to vote and pick which among the small handful of Democrats who voted with the Republicans to allow for warrantless wiretaps and grant retroactive immunity would be the first to be targeted. Chris Carney (PA) was the overwhelming favorite. We'll let you know when the radio, TV, billboard and newspapers ads start running. Rand Beers has an important piece up at HuffPo that talks about a progressive perspective on national security. The vision he presents is very different from the failed policies of George Bush.

Embrace core sources of American strength: For decades, our ability to ensure our security and promote our values rested on the global embrace of Americans, admiration of our democratic institutions, and a willingness to accept our leadership with the expectation that it would serve the global good. In the past seven years conservatives have squandered or ignored our most precious assets, and we need to reclaim them. Projecting America's core values abroad is key to reversing this and successfully implementing a sustainable progressive foreign policy.

Value our moral authority and credibility: Americans care deeply about our values and expect our leaders to reflect them. We must lead so that others will follow. In the absence of our moral authority and credibility, our allies won't send troops to Afghanistan, critical multilateral initiatives to address terrorism or reduce the threat of nuclear weapons will flounder, our business partners will no longer welcome our investments, and people struggling for freedom will no longer believe that we share their values. The restoration of our international prestige and global reputation establishes the foundation for an effectual foreign policy future.

Use all our tools-- tackle complex problems with smart, comprehensive solutions: Americans know instinctively that our lives are connected with the lives of others, and that we're at our best when we work with others to tackle the most difficult problems - tracking terrorists across borders, preventing the spread of nuclear weapons, fighting diseases like smallpox and AIDS, and stopping global warming. Our political leaders must reflect these realities we know about ourselves, and should be expected to foster cooperation to serve our interests and values.

Demonstrate good stewardship of our military might -- respect and transform the military: Our mix of military capabilities must be rebalanced away from the structures of the last century and toward missions like counterterrorism, counter-insurgency, and homeland defense. America's greatest military asset is our men and women in uniform. Maintaining a strong volunteer military means meeting the needs of those who serve - better training and equipment for soldiers in the field, proper care for family members, and better health care for veterans. Strong national security should not be hindered by mismanagement and corruption. That means more stringent oversight on how money is spent, and better accountability.

Meanwhile, we contacted many of the Blue America candidates and asked them to explain how they feel about Bush's demands on the FISA bill. Glenn and I quoted some in our earlier posts. Here are some of the others that you might be interested in reading:

Congressman Tom Allen (D-ME) voted against retroactive immunity and against warrantless wiretaps. Last night he told us why: "Warrantless domestic surveillance is yet another example of the Bush Administration denying civil liberties to ordinary Americans. I strongly oppose retroactive immunity for telecom companies and will continue to vote against it. Neither the government nor large telecommunications corporations are above the law; everyone must be held accountable."

Victoria Wulsin isn't a member of Congress yet but her district is represented by extremist Jean Schmidt who voted in favor of warrantless wiretaps and in favor of granting retroactive immunity to the lawbreaking telecoms (who donate to her campaign) This morning, this is what Vic had to say about that: "The Bush Administration has run roughshod over the Constitution and now they expect the American people to pay for it by granting retroactive immunity to big corporations that illegally violated their customers' privacy. Congress cannot not let itself be bullied into giving away the civil liberties that belong to every American, and I promise that as a congresswoman I will never put the interests of corporations before the rights of the people."

Jim Himes, who is running to replace Bush rubber stamp Chris Shays in Connecticut felt just as strongly: "I strongly oppose granting retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies who may have illegally spied on Americans at the behest of the Bush administration. The issue at stake here is simple and fundamental-- no person, president, or corporation is ever above the law, period. Protecting our nation from the real threats to our security is one of the most serious responsibilities of Congress. Yet Chris Shays and the rest of Bush's allies in Congress have once again abdicated this
responsibility by reducing the debate on security to peddling fear, straw men, and mistruths for partisan political gain. America is better than this, and both parties in Congress should be too."

And this isn't just a red state/blue state issue. Larry Joe Doherty, who is gaining tremendous traction against pathetic Bush rubber stamp Michael McCaul in a sprawling Texas district between Austin and the Houston suburbs, is just as adamant as anyone else about protecting the Constitution. "This out of control president has systematically shredded the Constitutional protections of every American, trashing the patriotism of anyone who is willing to stand up to him. To think that the U.S. Congress should come along behind George Bush rubber-stamping the suspension of the Bill of Rights is offensive to me. Congress is sworn to protect the Constitution, and gagging the courts from upholding the Rule of Law is the wrong way to protect this country from its enemies."

Not many candidates have been as proactive on this issue as Martin Heinrich in New Mexico. He's made it a big issue in his campaign and has written a lot about it. This morning he summed up his thoughts in 3 short sentences: "In America, no one is above the law. We shouldn't compromise the integrity of our justice system to protect George Bush's friends and allies in the telecommunications industry. Anyone who illegally spies on American citizens should be brought to justice."

Leslie Byrne, a former and future member of Congress from northern Virginia, has been talking about this too. Here's what she told us today: "In March I said, 'I'm against immunity. The telecommunications companies who complied (not all did) have some of the highest priced legal talent available. They should have asked for a court ruling before handing over their customers records. I was very pleased that the US House found their voice on this issue.' I can only add that I hope the House continues to use that voice to protect Americans."

Let me end with a comment from Mark Begich, the Alaska Democrat running against one of Bush's worst-- and most unhinged-- senatorial henchmen, Ted Stevens. Mark is a hawk on rule of law. "The Alaskan Constitution protects the right of privacy. The 4th Amendment demands a warrant be issued for any search. And FISA says that domestic electronic surveillance must be approved by a special court. None of these facts should be forgotten on behalf of telecommunications companies that now face legal consequences for the role they played in the Bush administration's warrantless wiretapping program. I am strongly opposed to retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies."

BLUE DOGS THREATEN TO BACK GOP ON FISA

Click to read the full page newspaper ads being run in northeast Pennsylvania

I don't know if Hoyer put this story out or it's an actual attempt by the Blue Dogs to force retroactive immunity down our throats. I suspect it's both. Yesterday CongressDaily reported that House and Senate leaders-- the House supposedly representing the "no retroactive immunity" position and the Senate buckling under to the treacherous Rockefeller position that all telecom executives and Bush Regime operatives who broke the law should get off scott free and be immune from any prosecution-- were trying to hammer out a deal. Although the House voted against retroactive immunity, many suspect that Hoyer has promised the Blue Dogs that he will deliver it in the negotiations. He made sure one of the most vile Blue Dogs accepting telecom bribes, Iowa Congressman Leonard Boswell, would be in on the negotiations.

When Iowa Democrats go to the polls June 3 they can vote to return their Blue Dog/Bush Dog congressman, Leonard Boswell to another term of treachery or they can vote for a progressive reformer, Ed Fallon. We contacted Ed to see what he felt about Boswell's role in this travesty of justice. "Through the PATRIOT Act, the Protect America Act, and numerous other actions, the Bush Administration has systematically deprived Americans of their civil liberties. The last line of defense would seem to be the courts, and now Bush and a handful of Blue Dog Democrats are determined to deprive us even of this last resort by giving retroactive immunity to the telecom companies for any assistance they gave the Administration in illegal eavesdropping. Some of these Democrats, including Congressman Leonard Boswell, receive significant donations from telecom companies. These companies are now counting on the lawmakers who they have supported to deliver for them. We need to make it clear to lawmakers that the Bill of Rights is not for sale."

Liberal lawmakers [and most Americans] want greater controls on how the government conducts electronic surveillance and they do not support giving blanket retroactive legal immunity to telecommunications companies that helped the Bush administration conduct electronic surveillance of U.S. citizens without warrants.

[So-called] moderate and conservative Democrats, including some Blue Dogs, have expressed support for a Senate-passed FISA bill, which would essentially dismiss about 40 lawsuits against the telecommunications companies.

Some Blue Dogs threatened to support a discharge petition that would force a House vote on the Senate bill if Hoyer cannot strike a compromise by the end of this week.

Another crooked Republican in the pockets of the telecom giants, Missouri Senator Kit Bond, sent Hoyer a proposed "compromise" that would allow the secret FISA court to determine if the telecoms should be granted immunity. Most progressives recognize that for what it is but, of course, Hoyer and the Blue Dogs are wagging their tails and drooling at the thought of huge bribes headed their way from the telecoms if this passes.

Representative Carol Shea-Porter has been targeted by shady Republican front groups for her consistent votes opposing warrantless wiretaps against American citizens and opposing retroactive immunity for criminals. Last night we asked her why she feels so strongly about this issue, even though hundreds of thousands of dollars in GOP attack ads are being used against her in New Hampshire. "'Retroactive immunity' merely inoculates the telecoms against the rule of law-- the foundation of our democratic government.  It doesn't just chip away at this foundation, but gives it a massive blow. As John Adams said, we are a 'government of laws, not of men.' Our Constitution and laws protect our rights and liberties from the whim of any particular president. Immunizing the telecoms means suspending the Constitution at our convenience, and abandoning the rule of law that keeps us safe."

This morning Glenn Greewald over at Salon leads the way in explaining how Blue America has decided to help hold one Blue Dog/Bush Dog, Chris Carney, accountable for his support for unconstitutional actions by Bush. Carney has been a virtual rubber stamp for Bush's worst policies and proposals, a disgrace to the ideals of the Democratic Party. Here's the TV ad that will be running in his district over the next months.



If you'd like to see this ad keep running-- as well as newspaper and radio ads-- please contribute to our special Blue America FISA accountability fund. And if you want to help out candidates and members of Congress who do not support retroactive immunity and warrantless wiretaps, you can donate to any or all of the Blue America candidates, like Carol Shea-Porter and Ed Fallon.

Mark Schauer, the Blue America endorsed candidate running against far right extremist and Bush rubber stamp Tim Wallberg in suburban Detroit, certainly understands this issue and understands why it's important to stand up and fight for American freedom from tyranny. This morning Mark told us that "Tim Walberg and George Bush are more interested in protecting big corporations that have helped them listen to our phone calls, read our emails, and violate our privacy than they are about protecting law-abiding citizens. I believe our Constitution and our rights, including our right to privacy, are worth fighting for. If our government or big corporations break the rules, they should be held accountable."

CAN WE HEAR A FEW BARS OF "ANOTHER ONE BITES THE DUST" IN HONOR OF VITO FOSSELLA

As we predicted last week, he isn't going to resign before July, which would give Governor Paterson an opportunity to call a special election. Instead he'll just resign after that (or maybe stick it out until January)-- and, of course, not run in November. He sat down with the Staten Island Advance and explained that he won't be seeking a sixth term. "After a great deal of consideration, I have made the decision not to seek re-election to the United States House of Representatives this November. This choice was an extremely difficult one, balanced between my dedication to service to our great nation and the need to concentrate on healing the wounds that I have caused to my wife and family." He doesn't mention which wife or which family.

This morning's NY Times speculates that the pressure he was getting from panic-stricken Republicans in Washington was too much for him to resist. John Boehner has already picked a successor, Staten Island D.A., Daniel M. Donovan

Mr. Fossella’s decision comes just before the Staten Island Republican Party’s executive committee is to interview candidates for office-- a meeting set for Wednesday. It also comes a few weeks before candidates for office in the fall are required to begin collecting signatures for petitions to be eligible to run.

The decision also sends tremors through the Republican Party on Staten Island, as it seeks to find a replacement on the party’s ballot for Mr. Fossella in November.

Another potential Republican candidate is state Senator Andrew D. Lanza, a longtime friend of Mr. Fossella’s. But Mr. Lanza would face intense pressure from Republican leaders in Albany, who are highly reluctant to see anything that might weaken their already slim majority in Albany.

Two Democrats are seeking the congressional seat: Stephen A. Harrison, a Brooklyn lawyer who fared better than previous opponents, winning 43 percent of the vote. The other is City Councilman Domenic M. Recchia Jr.

For years, Mr. Fossella has presented himself as a family-values moderate Republican. He has also been a strong supporter of President Bush and Vice President Cheney.

But the Congressman has been criticized by Democrats, who contend that his continued support of the war in Iraq has put him out of touch with the district.

Furthermore, they say, Staten Island has been hit hard by the nation’s mortgage crisis and health care has deteriorated.

The NY Daily News has a juicier version of the story and, unlike the Old Gray Lady, mentions "love child" and the "love junkets" and includes a photo of his other wife.

Of pals at the Albany Project have all the details of the Democrats and Republicans tossing their hats into the ring now that Fossella has admitted it's over.

THERE'S A PINCHED, CORRUPT, HYPOCRITICAL & FEARFUL REPUBLICAN OREGON AND THEN THERE'S THE OREGON OF HOPE... AND OBAMA

Obama in the center, GOP kooks on the fringes

I hope we haven't given anyone the impression that Staten Island Republican congressman Vito Fossella is the only GOP Family Values hotshot with a peculiar sense of Family Values. As we've mentioned, he has two families, Mary Pat and 3 children in Staten Island, keeping up appearances that he's a normal kind of guy with a family. And then there's Laura Fay and their "love child" closer to the office. Many wonder if he belongs to two churches or he just uses church as part of his ruse in Staten Island.

Anyway, enough about Fossella for today. Last week we mentioned the Oregon bloodbath between two crazy right-wing lunatics trying to get the worthless GOP nomination for a congressional seat being vacated by Democrat Darlene Hooley. One loon accused the other loon-- both of whom are huge typical Republican Family Values hypocrites-- of knocked up some girl and driving her to an abortion clinic to get rid of the evidence. (Erickson, the abortion guy, was endorsed by the Oregon anti-abortion organization, Oregon Right To Life, which is now... confused.) The two kooks, Kevin Mannix and Mike Erickson, are in a statistical dead heat going into tomorrow's Oregon primary. But now it comes out that Erickson is also a coke freak. He's been accused of throwing wild coke parties and appears to have been living a disolute lifetsyle. Republicans are relieved that no one has pictures of him in bed with any underage boys.