Friday, April 28, 2006

HELP BARBARA BOXER FIND THE BEST DEMOCRATS TO HELP RATHER THAN THE MOST BUSH-FRIENDLY

>


Who's the best U.S. Senator? A case is often made among progressives that it's California's fiery Barbara Boxer. She's my Senator and I'm very proud she stands up to the Bush Regime more than anyone else in the Senate. Only two U.S. Senators have formally signed on as co-sponsors of Russ Feingold's resolution to censure Bush: Tom Harkin and Barbara Boxer. And only one U.S. Senator stood with the progressive, committed believers in democracy from the congressional Black Caucus to challenge Bush's theft of the 2004 presidential election in Ohio: Barbara Boxer, forever earning her the respect from, and endearing her to, progressives from around the country.

So this morning when I got an e-mail that led me to Senator Boxer's PAC FOR A CHANGE, I clicked right on it. Grrrrrr... Not what you want to see from the Democrat's putatively most progressive senator-- and certainly not something you would see from a sharper politician. I've written about "the Boxer flaw" before. (Senate staffers rate her intellectual capabilities at the very bottom of the barrel-- almost as dumb as Rick Santorum, the Senate's stupidest man, and, basically, in the same league with the 2-digit IQ club of George Allen and Jim Inhofe. But, like people used to say about Teddy Kennedy when he was first elected, being a great senator goes beyond mere intellectual capacity. Like Kennedy-- more so in fact-- Boxer has great instincts for fairness and justice.) Damned but does she need better political advice!

I wrote her a letter today and asked her where she came up with the list of incumbent Democrats she's asking us to contribute money to (through her PAC). Every single one of them is a right-of-center, corporate-oriented, endangered Democratic incumbent, endangered because they are all Republican-lite members of Congress who don't bother to offer a clear choice to voters. Everyone one of them is the kind of Democrat who wrecks, to one extent or another, the Democratic Party brand. And I knew exactly where the most progressive senator in America is getting her miserable advice-- the reactionary, anti-progressive, anti-grassroots DCCC boss, Rahm Emanuel. Key give-away: were Boxer doing her own research she would have definitely included endangered Democratic incumbent Julia Carson (IN), who votes a lot like Boxer (and not at all like Emmanuel and the corporate stooges he's gotten Boxer to shill for). The 10 incumbents on her list include Jim Marshall(GA), an aggressive Bush Regime war defender-- as bad as Lieberman-- who in early November broke ranks with the House Democratic caucus and provided Republicans with the one-vote margin of victory to prevent a serious investigation into the Bush Regime's lies and deceptions surrounding the lead up to their attack and occupation of Iraq. I wonder if Boxer even knows that she's asking her donors to contribute to that instead of to needy Democrats like Carson who also face tough challenges from the GOP.

And, like I said, all the Democrats on her list-- 100% of them-- are, at best, non-progressive: besides Marshall, John Salazar (CO), John Barrow (GA), Leonard Boswell (IA), Melissa Bean (IL), Charlie Melancon (LA), John Spratt (SC), Stephanie Herseth (SD), Chet Edwards (TX), Rick Larsen (WA). Am I advocating the defeat of these candidates? ABSOLUTELY NOT (at least not in general elections against Republicans). But does that mean that thinly stretched, grassroots resources should be directed, from one of the-- if not the-- Senate's most progressive superstars to the congressional Democrats Bush has been most able to count on to vote for his war and occupation policies, for his horrendous economic policies, for CAFTA, for much of his hare-brained and distrastous corporate agenda that has been so destructive to our country, our party and to the Democratic values we hold dear: Opportunity, Fairness, Investment (in people and our future)?

She also has a category for challengers and at least she includes some actual progressives along with the Emanuel/DCCC stooges. I recommend you click on over there and vote for one of the good ones, like Francine Busby (CA), Lois Murphy (PA), Eric Massa (NY), Peter Welch (VT), or Joe Sestak (PA). As for Barbara, she ought to take a look at the difference between grassroots progressive Gretchen Clearwater(IN) and Rahm Emanuel conservative Dem Baron Hill before she asks her supporters to shell out money for someone like Hill.

3 Comments:

At 5:29 AM, Blogger cybermome said...

Define the word best. To my sister in law it means Hillary for Prez...

ugh...

I'm in Pa.I work both sides. I volunteer with my local Dems where I talk about impeachment and real progressive candidates. I also work with DFA here in PA where we are trying to build a farm team of Dems who are progressive so when elections roll around we have choices. And bitch like hell when people like Schumer decide to "annoint " candidates like Casey.
(altough as much as I dislike Casey I believe there are very few here in Pa they could beat Sanatorium)Sorry but Chuck Pennechio doesn't have the $$$$ or grass roots support.

Right now I am focused on helping the Murphys ( Pat and Lois) and Joe Sestak...

Then on to 2008 where will we not stand by and let the beltways Dems shove another "electable" candidate like Kerry down our throats

Russ Feingold 2008

 
At 5:29 AM, Blogger cybermome said...

Define the word best. To my sister in law it means Hillary for Prez...

ugh...

I'm in Pa.I work both sides. I volunteer with my local Dems where I talk about impeachment and real progressive candidates. I also work with DFA here in PA where we are trying to build a farm team of Dems who are progressive so when elections roll around we have choices. And bitch like hell when people like Schumer decide to "annoint " candidates like Casey.
(altough as much as I dislike Casey I believe there are very few here in Pa they could beat Sanatorium)Sorry but Chuck Pennechio doesn't have the $$$$ or grass roots support.

Right now I am focused on helping the Murphys ( Pat and Lois) and Joe Sestak...

Then on to 2008 where will we not stand by and let the beltways Dems shove another "electable" candidate like Kerry down our throats

Russ Feingold 2008

 
At 6:32 PM, Blogger Timcanhear said...

The truth on sending money to either party is it only serves to thicken the purse of the corporate media. No more. Giving to political party's is lame and old school, serving little real purpose. Like oil companies buying airtime to show their nonexistent 'GREEN' side, radio and tv ads only serve to dumb down the dumb even further, giving us what we have now, monkey boy and trigger man. Mobilizing people is what counts. Negative attack ads are hack. Spend the money on mobilizing voters through the internet and I'm there.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home