CALIFORNIA DEMOCRATIC PARTY GETS THE BALLS TO BITCH SLAP RAHM EMANUEL INSIDERS-- ENDORSES JERRY McNERNEY TO RUN AGAINST POMBO

I was at a gathering of progressives recently and 3 national progressive leaders were addressing the room. They were on a raised dais and they were all witty and brilliant and obviously dedicated. One of them seemed to speak a teensy weensy bit disparagingly about "pre-2000 Democrats." The 3 progressive leaders were pre-2000 Republicans, now staunch Democrats. I have to admit I felt a twinge of resentment-- just a twinge, I swear-- but then I remembered: I wasn't born a Democrat either!

Just the way Stan's dad Randy declared that the whole Marsh family would henceforth be Mormon, my grandpa, the family patriarch, one day declared we were no longer Socialists but Democrats. I was even younger than Stan, so I didn't understand-- but I grew up a Democrat. There were no Republicans where I grew up-- unless they were in the closet. But I always remembered feeling proud that when my party ran candidates, the yard signs always proudly, boldly said DEMOCRAT; the Republican candidates never used to mention their party affiliation on their signs.

When I got to college-- a state University-- I met people from all over the state and there were some Republicans, though not many. In fact I was president of the Young Democrats on the campus (until I changed it-- much to the chagrin of DC-- into an SDS chapter) and I recall we had lots of members and the Young Republicans had like 10, 9 nerdy guys with pimples and a girl. (I just checked the yearbook.) I didn't hate them. They were kind of beneath contempt; the 9 nerdy guys were all very pro-War in VietNam but-- like Cheney-- they were on all student deferments.

After college I went to live abroad until Nixon was removed from Washington and there were no Republicans I ran into in Afghanistan or Nepal or Sri Lanka, nor in the meditation center I worked in for 4 years in Amsterdam. I didn't really get to interact with any until I sold my little indie record company to CBS in the early 80s. There was one there; he was a complete dick and the worst person I ever met and a coke freak and I learned a lot from him, like what to never do to an artist or an employee. (The first minute I ever met him he said to me, "I never had a problem with Richard Nixon. Did you?")

I'll tell you how committed I am to the Democratic Party. Aside from never once in my life having voted for one for anything-- and I never missed any election since I was 18, even when I had to ride down from the Hindu Kush to Kabul to find the American Embassy and vote there once-- I even held back the puke I felt rising in my craw to pull the lever in 2000 for the Democratic ticket (which was hard to do for me, considering Gore's two horrible choices: his censorship postergirl wife Tipper and his corrupt, moralistic hypocrite of a VP nominee, Joe Lieberman). I've grown up since then. I will never ever vote for a Lieberman again. No. Matter. What. Luckily for Holy Joe I don't live in Connecticut-- and lucky for the even-worse-the-Lieberman Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee's putative senatorial nominee in Pennsylvania, Bob CaseyI don't live in PA either-- but in California, although I am helping to raise grassroots contributions for their progressive Democratic opponents, Ned Lamont and Chuck Pennacchio.



I just got back from a weekend in San Francisco where I picked up the Bay Guardian. There was a frontpage story on Pete McCloskey and his somewhat quixotic Republican primary campaign against what many people consider to be the post-DeLay U.S. House of Representative's absolute worst congressman, Richard Pombo. [Look, I don't want to get anyone angry at me who thinks that Bob Ney (OH), Jerry Lewis (CA), Duncan Hunter (CA), John Doolittle (CA), Katherine Harris (FL), Rahm Emanuel (IL), Pete Sessions (TX), Charles Taylor (NC), Curt Weldon (PA) or any number of evil doers in the House is as bad or even worse than Pombo; when it gets to measuring how horrible these people are, a point or two one way or the other barely registers. These are the worst of the worst, the absolute bottom of the barrel cesspool.]

Anyway, you may have noticed I stuck a "Democrat" on that list: Rahm Emanuel. If you're a DWT regular, you know I'm no more a fan of his than I am of his GOP mirror image, Tom DeLay. Emanuel is part of this story-- more so than Pete Sessions or Katherine Harris or Bob Ney. You see, Emanuel's DCCC has taken the extraordinary step of anointing a weak, former Republican, Steve Filson, who has nothing much to say beyond "Pombo is bad," in the midst of a spirited Democratic primary that features an exemplary grassroots, progressive candidate, massively favored by Democrats throughout the San Joaquin Valley (CA-11), Jerry McNerney.

Emanuel and his henchmen-- like Steny Hoyer and the agendaless, desperate-to-be-the-first-woman-Speaker-please-let-me-Rahm-I'll-do-anything Nancy Pelosi-- have been trying to make Filson's candidacy seem inevitable. But, unlike in many districts where their tactics have worked, Democrats in the 11th CD are too independent and feisty for them and have only pushed back harder against the anti-grassroots, anti-progressive, Inside-the-Beltway Democratic power elite. Filson's pathetic candidacy, despite all the big name Beltway-ites behind him, just has not taken off. McNerney just keeps getting stronger and stronger.

And today something really healthy for the 11th CD and for the California Democratic Party happened. The State Democratic Party Convention told Rahm Emanuel, Nancy Pelosi, Ellen Tauscher and all the other power-for-power's sake Democrats to go screw themselves, voting overwhelmingly to endorse Jerry McNerney. Party rules-- not the ones Emanuel ignores by declaring war on grassroots candidates everywhere in the country, but California Democratic Party rules-- require 60% of the delegates' approval to endorse a candidate in a contested primary. 75% of the delegates voted to endorse McNerney, making it unclear whether or not Emanuel and Tauscher will tell their puppet candidate to pack it up now.

"I am very honored to receive the endorsement of the California Democratic Party. This  is the culmination of campaigning tirelessly over the last two years and working to  establish strong relationships with party leaders throughout the district," said McNerney.  The California Democratic Party endorsement follows significant endorsements for  McNerney from the 2-million member California Labor Federation and SEIU's California State Council, representing another 600,000. These are people seriously committed to defeating Pombo and who don't want some out-of-touch DC power brokers telling them what to do. This didn't come from Rahm Emanuel; listen to it. This kind of hard-hitting attack is how Pombo is going to be retired, not by following Emanuel's namby-pamby playbook that confuses voters and makes people unsure about the differences. Yes, Tom DeLay and protégées like Richard Pombo are grotesquely corrupt but what about Emanuel and his protégées? Yes, Pombo votes against consumers at every opportunity, but what about Emanuel? (He's not nearly as bad as Pombo, of course, but bad enough to make some voters stop and think and then say, not without reason, "they're all the same. Politicians in DC don't care about people like me.")

I'm going to say something sacrilegious now (which is why I wrote that big intro establishing some kind of Party bona fides for myself). I would just as soon support Pete McCloskey, where he to beat Pombo in the Republican primary, as unlikely as that is, as I would support a boss-backed shill like Steve Filson were he to win the Democratic primary, also unlikely. With today's brave and forthright action by the California Democratic Party, it is more likely than ever that a true blue Democrat, a grassroots and progressive one-- with crystal clear differences between himself and Pombo for voters to consider-- will be able to take Pombo on mano a mano and with support of all real Democrats.

May I recommend that we all show some support for Jerry's McNerney's campaign today-- and for the brave stand of the California grassroots in the face of Emanuel and the Beltway Insiders-- by donating $10 or $20 or whatever you feel like, directly to Jerry's fund-raising efforts through ACT BLUE.


MONDAY EVENING UPDATE: THE OTHER ENDORSEES

Aside from Jerry, other non-incumbent congressional candidates endorsed at the Democratic Party Convention Sunday include Charlie Brown who has positioned himself to credibly battle John Doolittle in one of the most seriously gerrymandered Republican districts in the state (CA-04). Similarly, if less dramatically, the Convention endorsed Russ Warner, who already has pathetic GOP closet queen David Dreier (and his lover/over-paid chief of "staff") shivering in their boots over in CA-26. Louie Contreras got the official nod to take on Jerry Lewis who is, if anything, probably even more corrupt than either Pombo or Doolittle, just better and sneaking around and hiding it (CA-41). Over in CD-45 David Roth is the pick to take on GOP rubber-stamp and lightweight Sonny Bono's ex-wife (not Cher).

Bill Falzett got the go-ahead to take on Herger in CA-02, as did Bill Durston in CA-03 to take on the odious right-wing imbecile Dan Lungren. Neither T.J. Cox (CA-19), Steven Haze (CA-21), Jill Martinez (CA-24), Roberto Rodriguez (CA-25), Jim Brandt (CA-46), nor Jeeni Criscenzo (CA-49) had primary competition in their races to oust, respectively Radanovich, Nunes, reluctant Elton Galleghy Buck McKeon, bigoted right-wing psycho Dana Rohrbacher, and Darrell Issa.

Sharon Beery was endorsed over Ronald Carter to contest the open Republican seat in CA-22. Florice Hoffman got the nod over Christina Avalos to try to unseat Edward Royce (CA-40). Steve Young will face off against John Campbell in CA-48 again. Of course one of the Democrats big heroes, Francine Busby, got the nod to take on the Republican lobbyist scum they nominated to take Cunningham's seat. And there was no endorsement in the crowded field of candidates eager to challenge one of the GOP's arch-crooks, Duncan Hunter.

Oddly, there is no Democrat challenging Ken Calvert in CA-44, although he has been implicated in some of Randy "Duke" Cunningham's more nefarious plots, including a very suspicious trip to Saudi Arabia with some extremely crooked bribers.

DAMN YOU, TONY HENDRA-- MAGS HAS TAKEN A STEP BACK FROM THE BRINK

Damn You Tony Hendra!
-Mags



Somewhere in the murky murkiness of my past religious insanity, I remember the day it occurred to me that believing in the return of Christ and the rapture was not only unscriptural, but downright irresponsible. It was giving up on the world and everything in it. It was laziness on a grand scale, and not only that but a shirking of responsibility not only for myself, but for my kids and grandkids. Because one day it came to me in a flash……well, ok maybe it did not flash at all, maybe it just seeped into a crack that was developing in my already overheated brain…. to wit… “What if it is all untrue?”

Shiza! That would mean that anything neglected that caused people to die or environments to be poisoned would be our fault. And, anyone killed over some belief that wars were meant to be….no, destined to happen would bloody my hands and the hands of every Christian touting this delusion as fact. In short, if we were wrong, how would we ever apologize to our children and grand children. And, to top it off, even if we were right about the events, but thousands of years or even hundreds of years off in the timing, we would still be culpable.

I wish I could say this was a sudden realization that made everything A-ok and that it cured my religious zealotry, but no. This realization came after years of focus on “end times” books and prophesies and the bible. The realization came after I had taught myself biblical Hebrew and after I had taken up a self-directed decade long study of the history, archaeology, and sociology of the biblical era. Not only that, I had read anything I could get my hands on of scholarly work on the nature of the scriptures, their formats and the Hebraisms contained in them. After all that effort, I could only conclude that much of the Revelation of John was not at all what Hal Lindsey had said it was. However, ole Hal made millions deluding and scaring the bejeezus out of people.

I’m sure you have to be wondering why someone who is religiously insane would do all of that extra work trying to back up the teachings of their church. Look, like Tony points out, this is a great gig if you can get it. No suffering, no death. It was akin to the worm holes on Deep Space Nine…the blessed poop shoot as it were straight to heaven. No mortal coils for us, no siree. But, the time I invested in it came from an uneasy feeling that it was too good to be true. Bad enough the Jesus and resurrection thing seemed everyone accepted that, but this….this had the feeling of Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, and the Tooth Fairy to it and so far, life had pitched an 0 for 3 count on those characters.


I have not read Tony’s book (Costco, here I come), The Messiah of Morris Avenue, but I have just read his editorial on Huffington Post, but I say, “Damn you Tony Hendra!! That should have been my book!”

Sure I was busy diapering babies and wiping snotty noses, and then later finishing up college and struggling to support 4 kids on my own, but damn, it should have been my story to write. Or at the very least, I should have been in the loop. I know Tony had no way of knowing I was free now to collaborate with him, to hardy har har it up with him over the delicious joke played upon the unsuspecting ostrich like American public, to add my two cents worth to the twists and turns of his little novel. But, damn! What fun it would have been.

Of course, I forgive Tony, and in reality I say “Good on you Tony Hendra. It is about damn time someone wrote it.” I am angry with myself really. Until lately I fumed instead of writing. I fussed trying to figure out how to convince folks of something or other. I wasted time “discussing” but mostly cussing fools and trolls on the internet when I could have been playing with these crazy ideas and writing the comedy. We could all use a little levity during the dark reign of King George the Lesser. Let that be a lesson to me!

As for me, well, there seems to be no shortage of religious insanity out there. All of it is surprisingly public. Who would have thunk it? Surely, I can find something worth a comment or a story. I got a book in me, I swear. Sure…..oops, here come my grand daughters…..okay then, at least a column or two.

IS JAY LENO IN BED WITH PAT ROBERTSON?

My pal Danny sent me a copy of an open letter that his friend, Jeff Whitty, sent to Jay Leno. Jay Leno is no Jerry Falwell or Karl Rove. So why does he act like them?

Dear Mr. Leno,

My name is Jeff Whitty. I live in New York City. I'm a playwright and the author of "Avenue Q", which is a musical currently running on Broadway.

I've been watching your show a bit, and I'd like to make an observation:

When you think of gay people, it's funny. They're funny folks. They wear leather. They like Judy Garland. They like disco music. They're sort of like Stepin Fetchit as channeled by Richard Simmons.

Gay people, to you, are great material.

Mr. Leno, let me share with you my view of gay people:

When I think of gay people, I think of the gay news anchor who took a tire iron to the head several times when he was vacationing in St. Maarten's. I think of my friend who was visiting Hamburger Mary's, a gay restaurant in Las Vegas, when a bigot threw a smoke bomb filled with toxic chemicals into the restaurant, leaving the staff and gay clientele coughing, puking, and running in terror. I think of visiting my gay friends at their house in the country, sitting outside for dinner, and hearing, within hundreds of feet of where we sat, taunting voices yelling "Faggots." I think of hugging my boyfriend goodbye for the day on 8th Avenue in Manhattan, and being mocked and taunted by passing high school students.

When I think of gay people, I think of suicide. I think of a countless list of people who took their own lives because the world was so toxically hostile to them. Because of the deathly climate of the closet, we will never be able to count them. You think gay people are great material. I think of a silent holocaust that continues to this day. I think of a silent holocaust that is perpetuated by people like you, who seek to minimize us and make fun of us and who I suspect really, fundamentally wish we would just go away.

When I think of gay people, I think of a brave group that has made tremendous contributions to society, in arts, letters, science, philosophy, and politics. I think of some of the most hilarious people I know. I think of a group that has served as a cultural guardian for an ungrateful and ignorant America.

I think of a group of people who have undergone a brave act of inventing themselves. Every single out-of-the-closet gay person has had to say, "I am not part of mainstream society." Mr. Leno, that takes bigger balls than stepping out in front of TV-watching America every night. I daresay I suspect it takes bigger balls to come out of the closet than any thing
you have ever done in your life.

I know you know gay people, Mr. Leno. Are they just jokes to you, to be snickered at behind their backs? Despite the angry tenor of my letter, I suspect you're a better man than that. I don't bother writing letters to the "God Hates Fags" people, or Donald Wildmon, or the Pope. But I think you can do better. I know it's "The Tonight Show," not a White House press conference, but you reach a lot of people.

I caught your show when you had a tired mockery of "Brokeback Mountain," involving something about a horse done up in what you consider a "gay" way. Man, that's dated. I turned the television off and felt pretty fucking depressed. And now I understand your gay-baiting jokes have continued.

Mr. Leno, I have a sense of humor. It's my livelihood. And being gay has many hilarious aspects to it -- none of which, I suspect, you understand. I'm tired of people like you. When I think of gay people, I think of centuries of suffering. I think of really, really good people who've been gravely mistreated for a long time now.

You've got to cut it out, Jay.

Sincerely,

Jeff Whitty
New York, NY

Paul Krugman reveals the identity of the federal government's "Crony Fairy" (hint: when you think of cronyism, who pops to mind?—no, WHICH Bush?)

Nobody has been more specific than Paul Krugman in making the connection between the right-wing philosophy that government doesn't work and the staffing of the current administration entirely with people who can't make government do anything right. In today's column, he takes on the new Senate committee report on responses to Hurricane Katrina, which recommends abolishing FEMA and creating a new agency from scratch within the Department of Homeland Security:

The U.S. government is being stalked by an invisible bandit, the Crony Fairy, who visits key agencies by dead of night, snatches away qualified people and replaces them with unqualified political appointees. There's no way to catch or stop the Crony Fairy, so our only hope is to change the agencies' names. That way she might get confused, and leave our government able to function.

Once again, in response to the "NYT Columnists Held Hostage" campaign, I'm posting the full column as a comment. Here, reluctantly, I will just skip to the conclusion:

So let's skip the name change for FEMA, O.K.? The United States will regain effective government if and when it gets a president who cares more about serving the nation than about rewarding his friends and scoring political points. That's at least a thousand days away. Meanwhile, don't count on FEMA, or on any other government agency, to do its job.

Can Karl Rove and his henchmen really keep us common folk from reading about clown-style Republican antics on washingtonpost.com?

Is there any way to measure when a merely suspicious mind has crossed the line into full-blown paranoia? (And even then, as it's often pointed out, paranoid people do have enemies.)

This morning I tried several times to click on the link in a washingtonpost.com newsletter to Al Kamen's "In the Loop" column, which is usually good for a chuckle or two. Each time, the website claimed to be unable to locate the page and seemed to be suggesting that I was making the whole thing up and might benefit from a brief liedown.

Instead of giving up, I typed "al kamen" into the proffered search window and was ultimately offered a link to the column, titled "A 'Commitment' Goes Only So Far." The column turns out to consist entirely of items that poke pretty good fun at Our Ruling Republicans.

The headline refers to the lead item, which tells the hilarious story of House Speaker Denny the Blimp Hastert taking a blocklong photo-op ride in an experimental GM hydrogen-powered car, then—apparently forgetting that mobilizing a corps of photographers was the whole point of the event—waddling into his Chevy Suburban for the long ride (as much as a couple of blocks) back to his office. Now, I'd already heard this morsel on the radio this morning courtesy of Rachel Maddow. But it's the kind of soul-satisfying story that makes you crack a smile however often you hear it.

The other items in today's "In the Loop"?

• "Good News Comes in Waves"—a report from the RNC website's steady dribble of good news from Iraq, that "Baghdad is to get its first water park and wave machine," thanks to the Scottish company Murphy's Waves.

Kamen comments: "What better way to cope with the coming brutally hot summer in Baghdad with temps hitting 120 degrees? In the prewar days you might have had air conditioning, but electricity is still not up to prewar levels—even to WWII levels."

• "Are You Expendable?"—an item brief enough that there seems no reason to paraphrase:

"The State Department, anxious to fill openings in Iraq, recently sent out a cable detailing job opportunities for spouses and other family members in Baghdad. Some—office managers, housing coordinators, cashiers and such—appear fairly safe, since they are in the Green Zone.

"But then there is 'Expendable Supply Manager.'

"The job doesn't appear to pay much, and it sounds as though they aren't going to care enough to provide any security for you."


Now what I can't help but wonder is:

Do you suppose that Karl Rove and Ken Mehlman really have tentacles that reach into washingtonpost.com to prevent websurfers from seeing Their GOP at Work—in full clown mode?

RUBBER-STAMP REPUBLICANS FINALLY FIND SOMETHING THEY CAN DEFY BUSH ON-- MORE PORK!

Wednesday there was a mini-revolt among the most docile and spineless Senate in contemporary American history. As revolts go, it wasn't really much of one. But for pathetic, rubber-stamp Republicans, especially the galoots up for re-election and desperate to show they are not what they are (rubber-stamp Republicans), it was wild and crazy.

Pouting and whiny, Bush threatened (zzzzzzzzzzzz...) to veto a pork-laden emergency spending bill unless the Republicans take out some of the excess pork. (Note: Bush, who threatens more than any president ever, has not even one time vetoed anything, making him clearly responsible-- along with his rubber-stamp Congress-- for the worst fiscal situation in American history and, obviously, the worst deficits. The senators laughed in his face and told him, basically, to "bring it on." They passed the horrendous bill by a veto-proof margin.

It was also a rejection by rank and file GOP senators of Bill Frist, the despised Majority Leader who most feel was foisted on them by Karl Rove. A complete Bush puppet and self-server who is not seeking re-election so he can pursue a now-farcical run for the White House in 2008, Frist is more likely to end up in the Big House than the White House. The man back-stabbed by Frist and Bush and pushed out of the majority Leader job when the mask he shares with nearly all Republican senators-- KKK-symp-- slipped off when he was boozed up at a public event honoring racist colleague Strom Thurmond, lead the way in humiliating Bush this weak.

"I might be humiliated by my constituents," taunted Trent Lott, keenly aware that 53% of his constituents do not approve of the job Bush has done, "but not the president." The bill's biggest hunk of pork is a railroad rebuilding project for a privately-owned railroad in Mississippi which is being pushed by Lott and the equally corrupt and slimy Thad Cochran. "The very idea," continued Lott with visible disdain for the mentally challenged leader of his party, "that presidents, Republican or Democrat, have the only say over what is in a budget, is outrageous." Perhaps chiding Bush for how he came to power, Lott continued, "I got elected. I was here when Bush got here, and I'll probably be here when he's gone." He called Bush's veto threat "totally irrelevant... He's probably under pressure to veto something. Thank you for your input, Mr. President."

Despite Frist's best efforts to support Bush's position, the bill passed 72-26 in the Republican-dominated Senate. About half the Republicans voted against Bush's position, many hoping they could use this to prove to skeptical voters with long memories that they are not Bush rubber-stampers.

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.

TWO WITH ONE STONE-- DEFEAT RICHARD POMBO AND RAHM EMANUEL ON JUNE 6, TWO SIDES OF ONE FILTHY COIN

Today's Hill carries a story about the DCCC's Red to Blue project. DCCC head Rahm Emanuel, probably destined to be the Tom DeLay of a Democratically-controlled House, revealed the names of 22 Democrats, many of whom still have to face primaries from grassroots Democrats, who he is supporting. This completely contravenes Democratic Party rules about not interfering in primary contests. This is also a harbinger of what kind of sleaze Democrats can expect from the current Inside-the-Beltway leadership.

“This is an exclusive program that rewards the candidates and campaigns that are most skilled, not only at raising money on their own, but at getting their message across to the voters they hope to represent,” Emanuel wrote. Like most of what comes out of Emanuel's mouth, this is a total lie. These are just his pet candidates-- for one reason or another (and some, to be sure, are great-- like Francine Busby, Mary Jo Kilroy, and Lois Murphy)-- and they do not meet the criterion he always lays out about raising money and being the most skilled.

In northern California's hottest race (CA-11), the challenger favored by grassroots Democrats-- and probably the only Democrat who could beat the arguably worst unindicted Republican in Congress, Dick Pombo-- is not Emanuel's pathetic shill candidate (Steve Filson) but progressive Jerry McNerney. McNerney is too independent-minded and too unbossed for Emanuel's tastes but Democrats in the San Joaquin Valley value independence more than centralized party dictatorship and Emanuel's candidate has virtually no support inside the district whatsoever.

Emanuel, a corporately-oriented Democrat, once Bill Clinton's heavy-handed point-man on NAFTA, threatens challengers who try to campaign against Bush's occupation of Iraq. He represents the very worst of the Democratic Party, the kind of oozing pus sore that make independents shrink from political participation thinking that all politicians are corrupt, regardless of party. Emanuel is the #1 brand-killer for the Democratic Party and Nancy Pelosi is too weak (and ambitious) to stop him.

Another brand killer for Democrats, Adam Schiff of Glendale, CA, who has been practically begging for a primary challenge with his pro-war, pro-Bush voting record in a progressive L.A. district, has been picked by Emanuel, his ideological compadre, to "mentor" the candidates. The Emanuel-blessed candidates are Darcy Burner (WA), Phyllis Busansky (FL), Francine Busby (CA), Joe Courtney (CT), John Cranley (OH), Jill Derby (NV), Tammy Duckworth (IL), Brad Ellsworth (IN), Diane Farrell (CT), Steve Filson (CA), Kirsten Gillibrand (NY), Tessa Hafen (NV), Baron Hill (IN), Mary Jo Kilroy (OH), Ron Klein (FL), Ken Lucas (KY), Patsy Madrid (NM), Harry Mitchell (AZ), Chris Murphy (CT), Lois Murphy (PA), Heath Shuler (NC), and Peter Welch (VT).

Grassroots Democrats and progressives should avoid the DCCC and DSCC like the plague it is and only contribute to individual candidates. In fact, today would be a particularly good day to make a contribution to Jerry McNerney's campaign and let the Inside-the-Beltway power whores know that they do not own the Democratic Party; the people do!

GUEST BLOG: PAUL HODES FOR CONGRESS... IF YOU CARE ABOUT CHILDREN

Tony Guzzi is a DWT reader from New Jersey-- born and raised (Rutgers). He escaped corporate culture recently and works in cartoon art now-- I'm hoping he can get us some artwork when Adam goes on his inevitable every-week-is-spring-break drunken binges and we're reduced to stealing images from Google.  A concerned dad of three, Tony wants his kids to grow up in a safe, sane and rational world. He's a Paul Hodes enthusiast and I invited him to do a guest blog on the importance of Paul Hodes' campaign to replace the odious rubber-stamp Republican Charlie Bass.

Hodes the Phone! Where did my rights go?
-Tony Guzzi

For two days this past March, I attended a children’s entertainment conference in NYC called Braincamp. The seminar, hosted by noted entertainment attorney Howard Leib of New York, is a confab for the free exchange of ideas between the neophytes like me, industry veterans and a roster of executives who provide insight into the direction of education/entertainment entities like Nickelodeon, Disney, PBS and Frederator.  Going to Braincamp is an opportunity to soak up valuable information and trends from some very intelligent folks. This year, however, I got something extra out of it. I’ll share more about that in a minute, but for now some background.


The first Braincamp I attended was actually last year, right around the time when a show called Postcards from Buster, airing on PBS and produced by Cookie Jar Entertainment, raised the ire of the newly installed Department of Education Secretary Margaret Spellings. An episode entitled ‘Sugartime’ saw our friend Buster traveling to the great state of Vermont and sending back a postcard to his friends about the process involved in creating maple syrup. Nothing sinister so far, unless you don’t like maple syrup, but then, lo and behold, the program, a blend of live action documentary footage and animation, had the temerity to show a same sex couple and their child. All in the course of showing how maple syrup is made.

Mrs. Spellings, under pressure from her own bigoted outlook and activist Christian groups, among others, demanded that any federal money used to produce the show by PBS be returned. She was quoted as saying at the time, "…many parents would not want their young children exposed to the life-styles portrayed in this episode." True enough.   By the same token, then, many parents can change the channel. Also, many parents don’t mind exposing their children to the real life, inclusive and open life-style shown in this episode. That is called FREEDOM of choice.

Sadly, under the chilling pressure of this funding blackmail, PBS decided not to air the episode, but member stations in New York and Boston (WGBH), aired the episode despite the attempts at censorship.

Prior right wing Christian attempts to disparage children’s entertainment as subversive efforts at poisoning youths’ minds were ultimately dismissed as the folly they were. Remember Jerry Falwell and the purple Teletubby. I do. Remember James Dobson’s lament that Spongebob Squarepants was introducing homosexuality into our schools? I do. However, the difference between those unbelievable examples and Mrs. Spellings’ foray into censorship is twofold. She is an officer of the United States Government, sworn to uphold the Constitution. Not diminish it. Remember All Men Are Created Equal. I do. She wants to tell everyone what their children should be able to see! She might as well stand in your home and change the channels with the remote! You are just the ignorant parent!

In addition, the hypocrisy of someone who had no problem spending taxpayer dollars to pay for propaganda and fake news stories about the crap that is the No Child Left Behind Act is galling. Mrs. Spellings, via a deal with the Ketchum Group, paid commentator Armstrong Williams $240,000 to tout the merits of the NCLB Act on his TV and Radio shows as if it were his true belief of its benefits. Not to mention that Mrs. Spellings was a co-author of the legislation. How is that for a conflict of interest? You can’t make this stuff up. Paid propaganda. Probably illegal to boot. “Questions have been raised about that arrangement, it ought to be looked into, and there are ways to look into matters of that nature,” said Scott McClellan, White House liarperson. Sure, sure. What ever happened to this ‘investigation’?

As the once funny Dennis Miller used to say, “Sorry, I didn’t mean to get off on a rant there…” but the point of all of this, then, is that at that first Braincamp I attended, I was angry and disturbed by the actions of the Secretary of Education and figured the whole affair might be afforded a bigger reflection at the seminar. To my dismay, in response to a question to an executive from Cookie Jar Entertainment about the affair, there was only a brief discussion about the censorship of PBS and ultimately it was generally agreed upon that this was an aberration. I honestly didn’t believe so.

Fast forward to this year’s Braincamp. More examples of governmental censorship, FCC indecency fines and paid propaganda were prevalent in the year’s time between sessions. So, I was happily surprised that some of the discussion turned on several occasions towards the need to create a rational voice in Washington that could explain and espouse to the lawmakers both the quality of entertainment being created for children and to refute the hysteria and misinformation being spread by groups like the Family Research Council.

This finally brings me to the something extra I mentioned above. At the close of the two days, amid the thanks and information exchange, Mr. Leib mentioned a cause in relation to a candidate for Congress from the New Hampshire 2nd District by the name of Paul Hodes. As a friend and colleague of Mr. Hodes, Howard Leib spoke of the competent ability and unique viewpoint Mr. Hodes would bring to bear in Washington. I took note and left the meetings hopeful for a lot of reasons.

So, as both a concerned parent and an aspiring creator of children’s entertainment, I began researching Mr. Hodes background and based on what I found, learned that Mr. Leib was right about this candidate’s integrity, credentials and unique qualifications. Not to mention that he could supplant a rubber stamping Republican incumbent in Charlie Bass.

Putting it all together, I realized I was still stinging from the level of Margaret Spellings’ hypocrisy and heavy handed approach to PBS. That despicable behavior, coupled with the growing intrusion into the privacy of parents everywhere by groups like the Family Research Council, pushed me to take action. When I found the post here on DWT about the rubber stamping Mr. Bass’ stance against keeping the internet neutral, and Mr. Hodes opportunity to win in that District, I knew I had to act by working for a candidate I feel will give progressive parents, in New Hampshire and beyond, a voice that is, “committed to cleaning up the culture in Washington that places the interests of a very few above the rights of all Americans.” Visit  www.HodesforCongress.com for more info!

-Tony Guzzi

And in honor of Tony's guest blog, we just started an ACT BLUE Page for Paul Hodes. Please help in any way you can. He has pretty much been running neck-and-neck with Bass for campaign contributions, but, if patterns hold on, any day now a huge chunk of bribes corporate donations will fatten Bass' campaign coffers considerably. Hodes doesn't have Big Business to depend on-- only us.


MAY 20 UPDATE: HODES CONTINUES TO GAIN GROUND AGAINST BASS

David over at Swing State Project makes the case today about why Paul Hodes is a much stronger candidate this time. And SpongeBob Squarepants contributes to Hodes' campaign.

GUEST BLOG-- THE TROJAN HORSE: THE NED LAMONT IMPERATIVE

Star A. Decise is a fan of DWT and the author of The Engimatic Paradox, where Jon Stewart's "Daily Show" meets The New York Times' "Week in Review." The blog covers media and politics with a keen eye for humor and hypocrisy. It has an insider's knowledge but retains the public's skepticism. If you look on the blogroll you'll see it. Star agreed to cross-post this awesome Ned Lamont story for us. (Oh, and if reading Star gives you the urge to help out our country by helping Ned Lamont get into the Senate, please consider the DWT ACT BLUE Page, where you can become part of a nationwide movement of people chipping in $5 and $10 and $20 contributions that counter-balance the gigantic bribes corporations pay Lieberman to vote for their pet projects and for policies they favor.)

Once a political backwater with little import and even less voice, Connecticut is emerging as a national bellwether in the 2006 campaign with a chance of influencing the outcome of races across the country.

The key is the Nutmeg Senate race. But that’s caught Democrats on the horns of dilemma – whether to support one of the country’s reigning political powers, Senator Joe Lieberman, who was the Democratic vice presidential candidate in 2000, or his primary challenger, the political neophyte Ned Lamont, a Greenwich cable magnate.

The opening rounds in the primary battle have pitted Democratic activists squarely against state and national leaders. The hierarchy sees Lamont’s campaign as a pyrrhic quest that will wreak havoc no matter the outcome. But for Democratic activists, set adrift by the party’s identity crisis and its mushy message, Lamont’s challenge is priceless, Viagra for the party’s backbone and a chance to rediscover what Democratic means.

The Washington and Hartford criticism has twin thrusts: Lamont, who has established surprising momentum, will devour energy and resources needed to defeat the state’s three Republican representatives, all of whom are considered vulnerable. And that, the critics lament, could cost Democrats a chance to retake control of the House. Many Democrats say it’s simply too big a risk, even if 'Elasticman,' as Lieberman is known, has stretched what it means to be a Democrat beyond recognition.

This hyper-cautious approach stems from Republicans’ control of “everything,” to steal Jon Stewart’s memorable phrase. It has turned Democrats into Washington’s equivalent of cheerleaders, functionaries who can kick and shout but can’t directly affect any legislation. But with control of at least one lever of government, Democrats would command committees and have the power to issue subpoenas, making them a check in the constitutionally anticipated ‘checks and balances.’

Control of the House would allow Democrats to brake, if not stop, Republican’s most extreme legislative impulses, participate in drafting the Congressional agenda and investigate the administration’s most egregious ethical and legal lapses. It would open the door to Congressional hearings on Bush’s domestic wiretapping and his use of intelligence as a political cudgel. And, ultimately, it would pave the way for the House to consider the nuclear option – impeachment.

That’s led party officials in Hartford and Washington to line up cheek by jowl with Lieberman. But their attitude seems anachronistic, myopic and overly influenced by a natural hesitancy to turn on a longtime colleague. Rather than devouring resources, Lamont’s campaign is unleashing infectious energy that could propel Democrats to victory – both in Connecticut and across the country. So rather than cost Democrats the House, it’s likely that Lamont boosts their chances of picking up the 15 seats needed to recapture control.

The Greenwich businessman already has started to arouse the base and to attract Connecticut residents whose disgust with Bush in specific and politics in general had led them to turn off and tune out. Like Gene McCarthy in 1968 or Howard Dean in 2004, Lamont’s appeal sprouted among the political dandelions - those so angry that they were unlikely to get involved with – or vote for – anyone else. Lamont undoubtedly will absorb some resources that might have flowed to the Democrats challenging the incumbent Republican representatives. That’s especially problematic for Chris Murphy, the state senator running against the dean of the Connecticut delegation, Nancy Johnson, the pharmaceutical industry’s favorite daughter whose image as a beloved grandmother has survived her metamorphosis into the wicked witch of the far right.

But, at worst, it’s a temporary roadblock. The Lamont challenge is a primary battle: it will flourish or flounder long before the November election. If Lamont loses, as is currently predicted, Connecticut’s Democratic House candidates will have ample opportunity to recoup and to build on the nascent organization established by the defeated Lamont campaign. So their momentary handicap should be balanced by an expected surge from newly animated Lamont workers. And if Lamont wins, his victory will capture national attention and is likely to enthuse legions of anti-Bush voters - both in Connecticut and in other states. A Lamont primary victory will create the closest thing there is to a national bandwagon in an off-year election and will counter the widespread sense that Democrats stand for nothing. And that could be priceless, an incalculably important benefit to Democratic efforts around the country.

Under the Skin

Still, Democratic leaders in Washington and Hartford fret about the local impact of a Lamont victory. They hope that Lieberman, who is more popular among registered Republicans than among members of his party, will attract GOP voters who will then vote for the Democratic slate in what might be called “the flypaper” philosophy of politics. But it’s a desperate idea - probably a fantasy. Lieberman will certainly win many Republican votes. But while a complex ballot may have befuddled elderly Floridians, it’s unlikely that many Connecticut Republicans will make a similar mistake and vote a straight Democratic line. After giving the nod to their ideological soul mate, Republicans will jump across party lines and split their ballot by voting for their incumbent representative.

So Lieberman is more likely to be a Democratic Trojan horse than a tow truck for the party’s ticket: Republican turnout in the general election is likely to climb if the senator heads the Democratic ticket while Democratic turnout probably will fall. So Lieberman’s name at the top of the ballot may help Connecticut’s three Republican incumbent representatives by depressing Democratic votes. In the worst case scenario, it’s reasonable to argue that Lieberman could cost Democrats three House seats in Connecticut and several more in other states.

That’s the real risk of Lieberman’s campaign. It’s serious enough that even Democrats outside Connecticut should ignore the party’s hierarchy and marshal support for Lamont.

EDWARD MARKEY AND THE AMERICAN PEOPLE HAVE A BAD DAY AT THE HANDS OF BUSH'S RUBBER-STAMP REPUBLICANS IN CONGRESS

Massachusetts Congressman Ed Markey and the American people-- or at least the non-billionaires among us-- had a bad day yesterday. Two really important amendments Markey had introduced-- one in the Energy and Commerce Committee and one in the Homeland Security Committee-- were defeated by the Republican rubber-stampers who control Congress on behalf of Bush and his coporate backers.

Energy and Commerce dealt with the Telecoms bid to takeover the running of the Internet with the express purpose of making its operation a corporate profit center. Basically the entire Republican caucus supports this and all but a few bought out Democrats oppose it. The bought out Democrats-- Al Wynn (MD), Charlie Gonzales (TX), Bobby Rush (IL), Ed Towns (NY), and Gene Green (TX), all of whom are scumbags on the Telecom gravy train-- joined with the Republicans and killed Markey's net neutrality bill. Now it will be dealt with by the Senate.

The action in the Homeland Security Committe was even more dire. Committee Chairman Peter King (Long Island GOP sleazeball) utterly sold out his duty to national security by going along with Big Business carrot-and-stick demands that Markey's amendment to require scanning of all shipping containers be killed. King and the rubber-stamp Republicans duly killed it.

Markey, like most Americans not on the payroll of big shipping companies, wants 100% scanning of American-bound containers. After hearing from their corporate masters, King and the Republicans poo-poo-ed the idea. Wow, won't King be embarrassed if an American port winds up with a dirty bomb! A lot of bad stuff happens when Repblican are in power. Have you noticed?

WHY JANE HARMAN (D-CA) SHOULD BE DEFEATED

Unless you're a Zell Miller/Joe Lieberman type of make-believe Democrat, Jane Harman is probably not someone you want to see re-elected to Congress from her safely blue Democratic Los Angeles seat (CA-36) which runs from San Pedro to Redondo Beach to Venice. In a perfectly apt self-description, Harman has called herself "the best Republican in the Democratic Party." And although Joe Lieberman might debate her on that, her voting record is even more reactionary and more rubber-stamp Bush than even his!

The multi-millionaire Harman is a hawk on Iraq and supports Bush on the disastrous occupation. Not coincidentally, almost every one of her big campaign contrbutors are arms merchants. She voted for the Constitution-shredding "Patriot Act" twice and she was one of only four Democrats briefed on Bush's illegal warrantless domestic spying program. (Tellingly, when that program was finally revealed by the NEW YORK TIMES, Harman expressed outrage... not at the Bush Regime, of course, but at the TIMES, for making the American people aware of what she, Bush and other anti-democratic traitors were doing in secrecy.

This is a safe Democratic seat. Bush got his wimpy ass kicked by Kerry 60/40 in 2004 and the Republicans, perfectly content to keep their pal Harman in the seat, have a pathetic challenger sacrificial lamb named Brian Gibson who hasn't even bothered to put up a website. (He naps a lot and is said to be hoping for a Republican tsunami of support for Bush to defeat all Democrats in California and place him in Congress.)

On the other hand, there is a far more palatable way to get rid of the odious Harman. Much like Ned Lamont's courageous challenge to Lieberman in Connecticut, Marcy Winograd has decided to offer Democrats from Venice to Torrance a real choice in the June primary. Marcy, whose supporters were able to prevent the State Democratic Party from endorsing Harman, has been endorsed by Ron Kovic, Tom Hayden, Gore Vidal, Ed Asner, Cindy Sheehan, Tim Goodrich, Jim Hightower, Mimi Kennedy, Ed Begley, Jr., Mike Farrell, Howard Zinn, Stanley Sheinbaum, Dan Ellsberg, Robert Greenwald and scores of local Democratic clubs, as well as the local Democracy for America and Progressive Democrats For America and the Western Region of the United Auto Workers.

After reading Marcy's diary at MyDD I decided to start an ACT BLUE page for her. What got me so excited? Here, take a look yourself: "President of Progressive Democrats of Los Angeles, I am running to replace pro-war incumbent Jane Harman in California's 36th Congressional District. I run with a great sense of urgency, for we stand on the precipice of losing our democracy, of sinking a trillion-dollars into Iraq, of launching another war in Iran, of developing over 100 new nuclear bombs each year, and of shredding the Constitution. Everywhere I travel in the 36th District, a 30-mile urban stretch from San Pedro up through Venice and Mar Vista, a district where Democrats outnumber Republicans by 40,000 votes, people stop me in the street, in elevators, at meetings to ask, 'Where are the Democrats? Why aren't they speaking out?'

"I assure them this Democrat, Marcy Winograd, is speaking out passionately, challenging the leadership of the Democratic Party to stand for the possibility of peace, for the rule of law, and for a brighter day when we reject pre-emptive war and, instead, engage the world community in tackling illiteracy, AIDS, and poverty, all the while engaging our own citizens in redefining security as universal affordable health care, quality education to close the achievement gap, and environmental protection to cool the threat of global warming.

"Some ask, 'Have you ever been elected to office?' and I tell them, 'No, isn't that great? I have no investment in the status quo, in the power of the Beltway.' Quite the contrary. I have spent the last three years on the ground, knee deep in the grassroots, organizing town hall forums and congressional lobby delegations to end the US occupation of Iraq.

"As Co-Founder of the California Election Protection Network, I have stood on the frontlines of the movement to ensure our votes are not gobbled up by hackable electronic voting machines and to keep a close eye on a Republican Secretary of State who waltzed into office with a Diebold lobbyist on his transition team.

"I am relentless, unstoppable, moved by a deep sense of conviction that the Bush agenda of eternal war is not the answer, and that it will take a groundswell of both outrage and hope to lead our nation back to sanity, to strengthen the Democratic Party, and to ensure the Party stands for something other than accommodation to those who rush to war and pledge allegiance to a false sense of patriotism.
 
"A former LA County Democrat of the Year, I managed a Democratic Club headquarters in Santa Monica during the 2004 election and helped launch Swing State Sisters, a group of women who traveled to Arizona and Florida to GOTV for Kerry. Never again will I support someone who waffles so treacherously on the question of war and peace, particularly when the war in question is wrapped in a package of lies by men who want to build a corporate empire via a sanitized notion of regime change.

"Now is the time for all of us to summon the activist, the humanitarian, and the visionary inside ourselves. Yes, we must invest our precious time and energy into taking back Congress, but not without a commitment to peace, to leaving this world a better place for our children and our children's children, not without seizing the reigns from leaders, be they Democrat or Republican, who climb into bed with war profiteers and then masquerade as advocates for the people.

"To those of you who remain skeptical, who argue that a grassroots activist cannot claim victory over a $550,000 six-term incumbent, the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee-- Jane Harman, the same woman who boasted she was flattered to be considered the best Republican in the Democratic Party, to those of you who say the people cannot prevail over entrenched power and influence, I say, 'Join the hundreds of volunteers walking precincts from Venice to San Pedro, stand with me and Cindy Sheehan and Daniel Ellsberg and Ron Kovic and Fernando Suarez del Solar and Ed Begley and Ed Asner and Howard Zinn and Jim Hightower and Mimi Kennedy and Tim Carpenter and Lila Garrett and feel the excitement in the air, and hark back to the day weeks ago when we blocked my opponent's endorsement by delegates to the Democratic Party or the day that the rank and file of the United Teachers of Los Angeles and the California Federation of Teachers, now mindful that their leadership had knee-jerked endorsed a pro-war incumbent, said NO, we reject this candidate, we rescind our endorsement. Yes, hark back to the day when the Sierra Club could not muster enough votes for Harman after hearing me, Marcy Winograd, speak of war and nuclear proliferation as the worst environmental crimes imaginable, and know that the time is ripe for change and that the people are hungry for real leadership and that Winograd for Congress will prevail. Be part of this movement electrifying the grassroots, contribute, endorse, volunteer, blog away. Join Winograd for Congress (winogradforcongress.com) as we sprint to the finish.'"

She sounds good to me and, although I recognize what a tough journey it is for a grassroots progressive to go up against an entrenched Inside-the-Beltway incumbent, if anyone can do it, it is Marcy Winograd. Click here if you'd like to send Marcy some support.

GOOD NEWS/BAD NEWS-- MONEY POURING INTO DEMOCRATIC CAMPAIGN COFFERS

I've been watching apprehensively as the Beltway Republican machine fell in line behind GOP politician-turned-lobbyist who wants to turn politician again, Brian Bilbray. They have financed a vicious, misleading and massive-- $800,000-- negative attack campaign against good-government reformer Francine Busby down in CA-50 (northern San Diego County), where she hugely outpaced Bilbray in the first round of voting a few weeks ago. The new ads they are running-- completely false and over the top (trying to paint Busby-- an educator who has devoted her life to protecting children and fighting for their welfare-- as sympathetic to child pornographers). These GOP smear tactics, when backed by enough money, have been very effective in shaking confidence and determination among voters in the past.

So I should be happy to be reading the spate of stories recently about how the Democrats have been out-raising the Republicans this year. I'm glad the Democrats have been raising a lot of money, although I've seen Rahm Emanuel's corrupt, DeLay-like and Stalinist DCCC squander much of it attacking progressive and grassroots candidates to make room for Republican-lite shills and stooges who mirror his own reactionary Inside-the-Beltway politics. Democratic Party rules about letting districts pick their own candidates have been scrupulously observed by Howard Dean and the DNC and completely cast aside by the craven Chicago and NY party bosses Emanuel and Chuck Schumer.

But something scares me even more about this great influx of money. The small contributions coming in to candidates like Ned Lamont and Francine Busby, and even right-of-center Dems like Ben Nelson, from the grassroots warms my heart. The tainted sleaze factor money pouring in-- while much needed between now and November-- also scares me. Bloomberg just reported that the Inside the Beltway sleazy Democrats beat the Inside the Beltway sleazier Republicans in 2005 fundraising on Wall Street. "Democrats outdid Republicans last year in attracting political donations from investment banks, brokerages and fund managers for the first time since 1994, helped by support from hedge funds and companies such as Merrill Lynch & Co. Democrats got $13.6 million, or 52 percent of the financial industry's $26.3 million in political donations in 2005, said the Center for Responsive Politics, a nonpartisan Washington group that researches the influence of money on elections and public policy. In the two years leading up to the 2004 presidential election, Republicans received 52 percent of the $91.6 million given by the industry.

The money barons don't hand out money because they favor good government or Democratic Party grassroots values. God only knows what pigs like Emanuel and Schumer are promising to get their hands on this stuff!

The BLOOMBERG story paints a nice picture when they bring up an anecdote by progressive Torrey Funds chairman James Torrey. "Wall Street wants change'' on issues such as the Iraq war and the budget deficit. "I'm finding people who are registered Republicans who are saying to me, 'what can I do to help?'" BLOOMBERG further points out that Bush's catastrophic occupation of Iraq and the blatant corruption by the Republicans in Congress and in the Executive Branch "have helped drive President George W. Bush's public approval ratings to the lowest point of his presidency. That has spurred donations to Democrats."

But when you start digging down a little into the story, it gets less cheery. A big part of the Democratic success has to do with some of the worst elements inside the Democratic Establishment. "Hillary Clinton and Connecticut Senator Joe Lieberman, both Democrats facing re-election this year, were the two most successful fund-raisers in 2005 on Wall Street, said Sheila Krumholz, acting executive director of the Center for Responsive Politics. Senator Charles Schumer, also of New York, heads the Democratic fund-raising arm in the Senate."

A good example of how this sleazy business works is the picture BLOOMBERG paints of Morgan Stanley CEO John Mack's giving habits. A Bush Ranger-- he raised over $200,000 for BushCheney in 2004-- Mack gave Hillary's Senate campaign $4,000, his biggest donation to an individual politician. Has he seen the light? You tell me. He also contributed $1,000 to corrupt, far right maniac Rick Santorum. Furthermore, the article points out, that "while the industry's trend is to give more to Democrats, firms such as Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley, the world's second- and third-biggest securities firms by market value, have boosted their giving to Republicans in the past year... So far this cycle, Morgan Stanley's PAC has given 71 percent of its donations to Republican candidates, its highest proportion ever, according to PoliticalMoneyLine."

And, ominously, the story ends with the inevitable warning: "Still, if Democrats take control of at least one house of Congress, bankers and fund managers will have to cultivate relationships among a new set of committee leaders, some of whom have ideas about taxation and regulation that may not be well-received in the industry. 'I would imagine that is one of the calculations they are making now' when financial-industry leaders are planning their donations for the rest of the year." No doubt-- and no doubt they will feel very soothed talking to the likes of Lieberman, Emanuel, Schumer and Clinton, people not known for rocking any corporate boats.

In a not unrelated matter, today's NY TIMES has an editorial about the Republican's sham ethics reform bill, which the TIMES is properly calling "The Lobbyist Empowerment Act." This disgraceful piece of anti-citizen garbage almost makes the Democratic leadership's tepid and pathetic attempts at pseudo-reform look decent. Basically it's the difference between an F for the Republicans and a C- for the Democrats. Sure a C- is better than an F but... not that much better. To me it's just the Inside the Beltway Dems and their horrid, always-sure-to-lose consultants once again playing into Republican hands by not distinguishing themselves from the Inside-the-Beltway Republicans. (Of course, how could they when the Inside the Beltway monsters of both parties have more in common with each other than they do with their own constituents?)

"The House Republican leaders," rails the TIMES, "managed a new feat of cravenness during the recent recess, hollowing out their long promised 'lobbying reform' bill to meet the dictates of-- who else?-- Washington's power lobbyists. During two weeks of supposed inactivity, the leadership bill was chiseled down at the behest of K Street to an Orwellian shell of righteous platitudes about transparency and integrity. The measure to be debated this week has been stripped of provisions to require full disclosure of lobbyists' campaign fundraising powers and V.I.P. access in Congress. The measure buries all attempts at instituting credible ethics enforcement in the House. The nation should not be fooled. The proposal is a cadaverous pretense that Congress has learned the corrupting lessons of Jack Abramoff, the disgraced superlobbyist; Representative Tom DeLay, the fallen majority leader; and Duke Cunningham, the imprisoned former congressman. It makes a laughingstock of the pious promises of last January to ban privately financed junketeering by lawmakers. Instead, these adventures in quid pro quo lawmaking would be suspended only temporarily, safe to blossom again after the next election. The bill's cosmetic requirements for limited disclosure are overshadowed by the brazen refusal to plug the loopholes for lobbyists' gifts or to end their lavish parties for 'honoring' our all too easily seduced lawmakers. The G.O.P. leaders can't even marshal the courage to rein in the shameful use of corporate jets by pliant lawmakers. It's hard to believe that members of Congress mindful of voters' diminishing respect would attempt such an election-year con. One Republican proponent had the gall to argue that we mustn't 'chill' the right of lobbyists, the ultimate insiders, to petition government."

SCOTTY McCLELLAN STARTS SPENDING MORE TIME WITH HIS FAMILY GANNON/GUCKERT; TONY SNOW LEAVES ONE RIGHT WING PROPAGANDA OP FOR ANOTHER

When the rumors were just whispers I had to assure DWT readers that I wasn't making a late April Fools Joke when I said Tony Snow had been felt out by Josh Bolten to play Scotty McClellan's role in a reshuffling of the deck chairs on the Titanic. Well, today it becomes official.

I guess Bush and President Bolten don't mind that Snow referred to Bush as "an embarrassment" and the most "impotent" president ever. Snow, an extreme right wing propagandist masquerading as a "fair and balanced" tv journalist went from lock-step Bush rah-rah, fruit-cake to someone forced by the obvious to mention that Bush "doesn't seem to mean what he says." In fact last September Snow wrote in his column that Bush "has given the impression that [he] is more eager to please than lead, and that political opponents can get their way if they simply dig in their heels and behave like petulant trust-fund brats, demanding money and favor-- now!" That isn't the image he will be expected to help portray-- the carefully crafted, bogus Rovean image of Bush as a "leader"-- in his new position inside the White House. No more staying from the Party Line with remarks and digs-- just one month ago-- like "George W. Bush and his colleagues have become not merely the custodians of the largest government in the history of humankind, but also exponents of its vigorous expansion."

Fact of the matter is much of Snow's criticism of Bush and his disastrous Regime has come from an even further right-wing perspective, which should surprise no one who has looked into ex-socialist hippie-turned right-wing fanatic and nut-case, Snow. (The far, far right, which finds Snow one of their own easily embraces nutty statements like "On the policy side, he has become a classical dime-store Democrat. He gladly will shovel money into programs that enjoy undeserved prestige, such as Head Start. He seems to consider it mean-spirited to shut down programs that rip-off taxpayers and mislead supposed beneficiaries.") Of course, even normal Americans agree with some of Snow's criticism of Bush, like "When it comes to federal spending, George W. Bush is the boy who can't say no. In each of his three years at the helm, the president has warned Congress to restrain its spending appetites, but so far nobody has pushed away from the table mainly because the president doesn't seem to mean what he says."

I wonder if any of his colleagues will bring any of this embarrassing stuff up when he starts spouting the Bush Regime malarkey on a day-to-day basis. (Oh, and thanks Sean Paul from the Agonist for the nice photo.)

DO DEMOCRATS HAVE CORE VALUES?

Last week I went over to a friend's house for a little get together he was having for Jerome Armstrong and Markos Moulitsas Zuniga in honor of their recently released book, CRASHING THE GATE-- NETROOTS, GRASSROOTS AND THE RISE OF PEOPLE-POWERED POLITICS. Arianna Huffington served (ably) as an mc and Jane brought Ned Lamont along, an extra bonus for anybody-- and at this party, that was everybody-- who would like to see America's best interests served by the defeat of George Bush's favorite Senate Democrat, the execrable Joe Lieberman.

Before I run away into an anti-Lieberman tirade, let me reel myself in a bit and talk about something Lieberman knows absolutely nothing about whatsoever: Democratic values. I don't mean the values of the corporate whores Inside the Beltway, like Rahm Emanuel or the swinish Democrats who are joining with Republicans to sell out the free Internet to the big bribing Telecom corporations. I mean the values of the Party of FDR, Eleanor Roosevelt, John and Robert Kennedy, Martin Luther King, Harry Truman, Howard Dean, Russ Feingold and, most important, by far, the values of the working men and women who make up the actual grassroots Democratic Party and are daily betrayed by the Rahm Emanuels and Joe Liebermans and Joe Bidens in DC.

The highlight of the CRASHING THE GATE soiree was when Markos elucidated-- in a way Inside the Beltway Democrats never seem able to-- the elusive Democratic values slimy politicians can never quite get:

opportunity
    fairness
    investment (in people and our future)

Zen moment, everybody. It's simple, even elegant and it's why we all vote for the Democrats instead of the Republicans. It's even why I forced myself to eat a live skunk pull the lever for the odious and despicably reactionary Joe Lieberman for Vice President in 2000. The Democratic values: "Opportunity, Fairness, Investment in people and our future." The Republican values: Selfishness, Narrow-minded bigotry, Greed, Fear. Um... I'll stick with the first guys, please.

When I met Barack Obama (pre-Senator era) he struck me as super-smart and a true believer in the American dream and these all-American values. He's been a bit of a disappointment so far-- I mean be admits Lieberman is his mentor and his voting record could be better, a lot better-- but he's still one of the smartest Democrats in the Senate. So I was even more disappointed the other day at his smart ass quip when someone accused Democrats of not standing for anything. "That's not true," he shot back. "Democrats do stand for anything." Ha ha. I'm sure your colleagues on the other side of the aisle and over at Fox were rolling.

When Ruy Texeira and John Halpin say the Democrats' most urgent need is to stand for something, they're focusing inside the Beltway. Someone like Rahm Emanuel, or even a more progressive Democrat like Chuck Schumer, will never stand for something value-based. These are power players and their values are winning. We need people like that-- technicians who know how to win political and electoral wars. But that doesn't mean people like that should be involved in determining policies and other matters of importance. Rahm Emanuel is a crude authoritarian thug-- not unlike his GOP mirror image, Tom DeLay-- and he fights like a mad dog in the gutter. Right on, Rahm. But when it comes to setting Democratic Party policies, people like that should be talked to about the core values that Democratic grassroots supporters stand for, not asked to remold them in his own perverse image.

Forget the craven, self-serving politicians and careerists-- especially the proven enemies of grassroots Democrats and our values: the professional losers known as "consultants." As Armando wrote on Daily Kos Sunday, "Progressives need to fight for what they believe in-- and put the common good at the center of a new progressive vision-- as an essential strategy for political growth and majority building."

Democratic elected officials and strategists-- and even boosters-- don't understand how powerfully the perception of Democrats "not standing for anything" (a canard currently embraced by nearly 60% of Americans polled on the matter) drags down the Party when it comes to elections. "No identity," explains Armando, "translates into no character. No personal integrity. No vision worth fighting for. No domestic agenda. No national-security agenda. No basic understanding of the problems facing everyday citizens. No contrast with the other side. No reason to vote for progressive candidates."

This doesn't sound like my Democratic Party. And if we're going to win in November, despite the Rahm Emanuels, the Jane Harmans, the Jim Marshalls, the Melissa Beans, the Nelsons and the consultants who should have been fired long long ago, this shouldn't sound like anyone's Democratic Party outside the Beltway.

(Note on the art: Adam claims to be off drugs, although he defines drugs with a great deal of elasticity. If they comes from a licensed doctor-- oh, and do they ever-- he doesn't consider them "drugs." I'll let you be the judge.)

WHAT CAN A MERE PRESIDENT (AND HIS RUBBER-STAMP CONGRESS) DO TO HELP WITH THE PRICE OF GASOLINE?

Bush just finished a speech-- in Chicago I think-- about the sky-rocketing gas prices his Regime's policies have brought on. I admit I didn't watch it but it was on in the background while I was brushing my teeth and getting dressed and getting ready for my morning hike. Afterwards some silly CNN talking heads were babbling to themselves about "what can a president do?" What indeed?

A great idea-- albeit a "blue idea"-- would have been to give tax advantages to people who bought hybrid cars or small, gas-effcient cars. An old commentary on BUZZFLASH had a great take on the "red idea" of how to approach (acerbate) the problem. "Our last 'jobs bill,' enacted in May of this year, included a provision that allows small business owners to deduct the entire cost of vehicles over 6,000 pounds gross weight, up to $100,000. This was done to encourage small business owners to purchase new vehicles for their businesses. Well, kids, it just so happens that some luxury SUVs are over 6,000 pounds, including such small business workhorses as the Mercedes M Class, Cadillac Escalade, Range Rovers, and the ultimate machine for men with small genitalia, the Hummer. It also happens that the IRS doesn't care if you purchase a delivery truck for your small business or one of these gas-guzzling monstrosities to, say, attend business meetings at your law firm's private golf course. Either purchase is completely deductible. Since May this disgraceful loophole in the tax code has cost America $1.3 billion in lost tax revenue as anybody who could claim to be a small business owner rushed out and purchased a tax-subsidized luxury SUV. This was Tom DeLay's approach to the high price of gasoline and with a tightly Republican controlled rubber-stamp congress, the only way to have stopped this madness would have been for Bush to have vetoed it. He signed it. And then he signed a renewal the following year.

So, back to the CNN talking heads question about what a president can do. This one? Forget it. And we don't get a new one for another 2 and a half years. So... maybe it's time for us all to think what WE can do-- really do-- to get rid of the rubber-stamp Congress. I mean, are we going to sit around and wait for fearless federal prosecutors to arrest them one after the other until the prisons are filled with Republicrooks like "Duke" Cunningham, Jack Abramoff, Wade Mitchell, Tom DeLay, Bob Ney, Conrad Burns and the rest? Or are we going to get involved? Contributing to the progressive, grassroots candidates on the DWT ACT BLUE Page is a good step. People like Francine Busby, Ned Lamont, Jerry McNerney, Jan Schneider are in tough races right now and these are men and women who will get to work in Washington un-doing the years of destruction that Bush and his rubber-stamp Congress have wrought. And there's more that can be done than donating. I was so proud the other day when a DWT reader wrote me a letter about his frustrations with the political climate in the country. He's in Montana and I wrote back and suggested he volunteer at John Tester's campaign headquarters. I was over-the-moon when he wrote back a couple days later to tell me how he had just done so. One voter at a time, one district at a time, we need to take back our country. It is our country, not the corporations' and their political whores' country.


NOON UPDATE: REPUBLICANS BAD/DEMOCRATS (AT LEAST IN THIS CASE) GOOD

The DSCC has a fact page showing how Bush and the Republican rubber-stampers are responsible for high gas prices. When Bush occupied the White House in January 2001, the average price of a gallon of gas was $1.46. Today, the price is $2.91, a 100% increase over the course of the Bush presidency. [It's already over $3.00 a gallon in many areas of the country-- including my own.] Despite the verbiage to the contrary from Bush and his spokespersons, under his watch, U.S. dependence on foreign oil has increased by nearly one billion barrels.

Bill Frist and the Senate rubber-stamp Republicans killed a Democratic proposal to make gas price gouging a federal crime. Without making price gouging a federal crime, the federal government can only prosecute oil companies if they can prove collusion to control markets, a standard that is nearly impossible to meet. The Republicans who voted to directly raise the price of gas by opposing this simple bill include the following clowns who are up for re-election in November: George Allen (R-VA), Conrad Burns (R-MT), John Ensign (R-NV), Jon Kyl (R-AZ), and Richard Lugar (R-IN). Meanwhile, the watchdog agency that should be protecting consumers' interests, Bush's Federal Trade Commission has looked the other way when it comes to price gouging. Even during Hurricane Katrina, when price gouging was completely evident, the FTC investigation "found no evidence of collusion among oil companies in the 2005 gas price surge."

And the rubber-stamp Republican-led Congress has ignored oil and gas monopolies. Since 2001, the Senate Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee in charge of overseeing mergers, chaired by Ohio crooked pol Mike DeWine, has held exactly one hearing-- two years ago-- to examine high gas prices. They didn't do anything (helpful). And, of course, the GOP Congress has turned a blind eye to holding executives from the nation's richest oil companies accountable. In November, when executives from the nation's richest oil companies testified before the Senate Energy and Commerce Committees, Ted Stevens and the Republican leaders refused to force them to testify under oath. These are the same bribe-taking Republicans who crafted the 2005 energy bill which showered billions in tax breaks on oil and gas companies, (the same companies that showered Republicans with kickbacks, bribes and "campaign contributions")-- and even these greedy scumbags later testified under oath that they don't even need these breaks!

Last December, Senate Republicans-– with Cheney casting the tiebreaking vote-– adopted a budget package that included $20 million in cuts to Renewable Energy Systems and Energy Efficiency Improvements Program. Republicans who have to face their constituents in November who voted against renewable energy include George Allen (R-VA), Conrad Burns (R-MT), John Ensign (R-NV), Jon Kyle (R-AZ), Richard Lugar (R-IN), Rick Santorum (R-PA), Jim Talent (R-MO). Every single Democrat-- even reactionaries like Lieberman and the 2 Nelsons-- voted for renewable energy sources, as did a small handful of embarrassed Republicans. And, as every DWT reader should know by now, the oil gas companies are constantly lining the pockets of Republican incumbents and GOP candidates. In the 2004 election cycle alone, the oil and gas industry contributed more than $20 million to them and in the 2006 cycle, this number has already topped $6 million and is expected to go much higher as the corporations fight tooth and nail to keep their docile rubber-stamp Republican Congress in power.

And, last but not least, the Bush Regime's failure to properly plan for the war in Iraq has caused a disruption in the pre-war supply of 900,000 barrels of oil a day from Iraq, the largest single supply disruption that is leading to spikes in the price of oil.

Meanwhile New Jersey Senator Bob Menendez is proposing an immediate cut in the gas tax by eliminating tax breaks for oil companies to bring down the price for working men and women who are suffering under Republican rule.

Senator Bob Menendez (D-NJ) is fighting to give immediate relief to consumers during this summer’s busy driving season by providing a Federal Gas Tax Holiday paid for by repealing over $6 billion in tax breaks and giveaways to Big Oil. His amendment gives Americans temporary and immediate relief from sky high gas prices directly at the pump. It suspends the federal gas tax for 60 days to help reduce the cost of gas and diesel for consumers. This amendment will provide $100 million per day in relief directly to Americans.

This amendment will provide more than $6 billion in relief directly to consumers by eliminating the federal tax for both gas and diesel for 60 days. During the period of this gas tax holiday, the cost of gas will be reduced by $0.184 per gallon and the cost of diesel by $0.244 per gallon. Drivers will receive real relief every time they go to the pump during this period.

Big Oil made unbelievable profits-- over $100 billion last year alone. Menendez' proposal will provide direct relief to consumers and be fully paid for by repealing three major tax breaks that Big Oil clearly does not need and eliminating unnecessary and expensive royalty relief.

And Nancy Pelosi got pissed off and had something to say about Bush's idiotic speech too! You go, girl! (This is a rough transcript:)

"If you want to reduce our dependence on foreign oil and therefore improve our national security situation, you can't do it if you're a Republican because you are too wedded to the oil companies. We have two oilmen in the White House. The logical follow-up from that is $3 a gallon gasoline. There is no accident. It is a cause and effect, a cause and effect. how dare the President of the United States make a speech today in April many, many, many months after the American people have had to undergo the cost of home heating oil-- a woman told me she almost fainted when she received her home heating bill over this winter-- and when so many people making the minimum wage, which hasn't been raised in eight years, which has a very low purchasing power, have to go out and buy gasoline at these prices? Where have you been, Mr. President? The middle class squeeze is on, competition in our country is effected by the price of energy and of oil and all of a sudden you take a trip outside of Washington, see the fact that the public is outraged about this, come home and make a speech, let's see that matched in your budget; let's see that matched in your policy; let's see that matched in and you're separating yourselves yourself from your patron, big oil, cut yourself off from that anvil holding your party down and this country down. Instead of coming to Washington and throwing your Republican colleagues under the wheels of the train, which they mightily deserve for being a rubber stamp for your obscene, corrupt policy of ripping off the American people."

FATHERS AND DAUGHTERS-- REPUBLICAN STYLE. CONRAD BURNS PULLS A CURT WELDON TRICK

Jeepers! Now I feel bad that I singled out the daughter of fat, ole, corrupt sack o' shit Curt Weldon. Oh, it's not because I had my facts wrong or anything like that. Weldon's daughter has inded been a bag lady collecting millions of dollars in bribes for the Weldon Family from shady Russian and Sebian criminal interests. But what I didn't realize is that this is a basic Republican Party value and that in singling out Weldon-- regardless of how corrupt and criminal his activties-- I was ignoring all these other Republicrooks who suck up the bribes through their family members. And I'm not just about the obvious career criminals like Tom DeLay and families raised to be mobsters.


In fact, just yesterday the BILLINGS GAZETTE reported about how the #1 most corrupt Senator in the whole U.S.-- someone who takes no back seat even to the low-down likes of Bill Frist and Rick Santorum-- Montana's own Conrad Burns, was pullin' some strings for his daughter too. "Republican Sen. Conrad Burns announced a $1 million federal contract in 2003 for a company that employed his former top aide as a lobbyist and that put Burns' daughter, Keely, on its board of advisers two months after the senator announced the money." Burns, already beleagured by all kinds of investigations stemming from the bribes he was taking from his pal Jack Abramoff, refuses to answer any questions about this. Keely claims she "never received a dime," which is also what DeLay's daughter said and what Cunningham's and Doolittle's little wives said.

BUSH IS THE WORST PRESIDENT (EVER) BUT CAN YOU GUESS WHO THE WORST CONGRESSLOONS AND SENATORS ARE?

Last week everyone was shocked when Fox "News" announced that Bush's approval rating had slipped to a dismal 33%. "Hmmm..." I thought," if Fox says it's 33% it must be barreling right down towards Bush natural base, the 23-26% of Americans who are just sitting around pickin' their butts waiting for the Apocalypse to transport them to the clouds Heaven. And today, just a couple days later, Gallup is showing further slippage as Bush rushes to see if he can get as loathed and distrusted as Dick Cheney and Paris Hilton.

Meanwhile Bush's rubber-stamp Congress is held in even greater disrepute. In fact the good folks at Talking Point Memo have started compiling a ranking of the most corrupt politicians in the current Congress. I'll have to leave the fine lines of who is more guilty Bob Ney, John Doolittle or Jerry Lewis (TPM's top 3 most corrupt congressmen) to a jury of their peers. I'm just gratified to see that they Republicrooks we've been spotlighting over the past year are all getting the attention they have earned. (Our first anniversary is in a couple weeks!) Anyway, their top 3 crooked U.S. Senators are Conrad Burns (MT), Katherine Harris (FL, although she's still technically in the House and only running, if you can call it that, for the Senate) and Rick Santorum (PA). And their rankings for the U.S. House of Representatives are Bob Ney (OH), John Doolittle (CA), Jerry Lewis (CA), Duncan Hunter (CA), Richard Pombo (CA) [at this point on the TPM list there's a shout out for Duke Cunningham and the crooked lobbyist who is trying to be the next Duke Cunningham, Brian Bilbray, but I think we should just give a hearty Bronx cheer for the entire California Republican caucus; what a bunch!!!-- dirtiest, filthiest and most corrupt in the nation-- even worse than Texas!], Don Young (AK), Charles Taylor (NC), John Sweeney (NY), Tom Reynolds (NY), and Curt Weldon (PA). Oh, and speaking of Texas... what happened to Pete Sessions in this schema? And Cunningham gets a shout-out but the recently deposed GOP Capo di Tutti Capi, Tom DeLay doesn't?


PRE-SOUTH PARK UPDATE: LEARN THE LINGO

Eric at LouieLouie.net reminded me that in order to understand Republicans you have to speak a little bit of their language. I knew that. I mean my other job is as an international travel blogger and I always try to learn at least a few words when I go to strange and exotic places. Anyway, Rantical.com has an awesome Republican-to-English Dictionary that is absolutely a must. Enjoy!

DO YOU KNOW WHICH CONGRESSMEN WANT TO GIVE AWAY THE ONCE-FREE INTERNET TO THE BIG TELECOMS?

A couple weeks ago I reminded DWT readers that there is another crucial reason for everyone, not just New Hampshire residents, to get actively involved in Paul Hodes' campaign to get the low-down, rubber-stampin' right wing varmint, Charlie Bass out of Congress. Aside from just sleep-walking through the last 2 sesssions of Congress and basically giving Bush and DeLay a green light on every far-fetched, hare-brained scheme they come up with the wreck our great nation, Bass has joined a vile coalition of corrupt and reactionary Beltway Insiders (of both political parties) to give away the internet to their corporate paymasters.

Common Cause has been warning us about this plot in no uncertain terms. "The Telecommunications Act of 1996 promised more competition, more diversity, lower prices, more jobs and a booming economy. Instead, the public got more media concentration, less diversity and higher prices. Now Congress is poised to take up new telecom legislation, and special interests are once again mounting a campaign focused on almost complete deregulation of the telecommunications industry. It is vitally important that history does not repeat itself. What is at stake is not just how much consumers pay for access to the Internet or their cable TV, but rather the fabric of American civic discourse--how ideas get communicated or are stifled, whether citizens will have a way to get the information they need to govern themselves."

Now Sean Paul at The Agonist and Matt Stoller at MyDD are banging (loudly) on the chimes of freedom. We're in trouble-- big trouble-- and these congressional creeps are trying to ramrod this through without anyone knowing. Matt and Sean Paul are part of an ad hoc Save the Internet Coalition which is seeking 3 simple things:

The freedom to go where we want

      The freedom to say what we want

      And the freedom to innovate

Every politician who votes to give away the free internet to their contributors in the telecom industry should be defeated-- and that includes corporate Democrats as well as Republicans. Monopolies stifle freedom and innovation; they are inherently un-American. Or maybe you agree with Ed Whitacre, an avaricious pile of stinking shit on two legs who is also the Chairman of AT&T when he says that "the Internet can't be free." Do you?

Art Brodsky at Talking Points Memo Cafe has all the background and paints a clear picture of why this could be a catastrophe, a bipartisan one, like so much of the worst of Bush. We've come to expect Republican to take bribes from corporations and then let the corporations write the laws that affect their businesses. Six sleazy Democrats, on the House Telecommunications Subcommittee, all of whom deserve to be defeated, joined the GOP mad rush for telecom bribes. The Democrats taking bribes from Verizon and the other telecoms are Eliot Engel (NY-17), Bart Stupak (MI-01), Ed Towns (NY-10), Al Wynn (MD-04), Charlie Gonzales (TX-20) and Bobby Rush (IL-01). The Democrats on the Subcommittee who fought to preserve net neutrality are Ed Markey, Rick Boucher, Anna Eshoo, Jay Inslee, John Dingell, Mike Doyle, and Frank Pallone. All but one of the Republicans-- as usual in the back pocket of Big Business-- voted to kill net neutrality. The enemies: Fred Upton (MI), Michael Bilirakis (FL, who is resigning but is trying to get his equally horrible son into Congress in his place), Cliff Stearns (FL, who has a great Democratic opponent this year in Dave Bruderly), Paul Gillmore (OH), Ed Whitfield (KY), Barbara Cubin (a vulnerable Repug who deserves to be and can be beaten in November by Gary Trauner), John Shimkus (IL), the abominable "Chip" Pickering (MS), Staten Island anomaly Vito Fossella(NY), George Radanovich (CA), the aforementioned piece of crap from New Hampshire, Charles F. Bass, Greg Walden (OR), Lee Terry (NE), ultra-corrupt Mike Ferguson (NJ, whose progressive challenger this year, Linda Stender deserves maximum support), John Sullivan (OK), Marsha Blackburn (TN), and, probably the worst of all, a man God has shown us He hates, Joe Barton (TX).

Matt at MyDD is bloggin' up a storm on this and he's got all the low down as well as action points we can all take. We need to-- NOW.


TUESDAY MORNING UPDATE: ACTION ALERT

First thing this morning I was on the phone calling Tammy Baldwin and Henry Waxman about Interet Neutrality vs corporate monopolies. Very strange. But I had an e-mail from Joseph at CannonFire warning me that TODAY IS THE DAY! "Tuesday is THE only day to act if we want to save the internet. We must try to mount a huge one-day phone campaign. Calling the undecided congressman on the committee directly MAY do the job." Joseph did it; I started and he's already called 'em all. It was easy. You just need to say six words into the answering machine: 'KEEP THE INTERNET AS IT IS,' although the assistants I spoke to on the phone were friendly and easy-going. This threat is very real.

The undecideds:

Lois Capps 202-225-3601
Henry A. Waxman 202-225-3976
Mary Whitaker Bono 202-225-5330
C.L. (Butch) Otter 202-225-6611
Diana DeGette 202-225-4431
Ralph M. Hall 202-225-6673
Gene Green 202-225-1688
Jim Davis 202-225-3376
Nathan Deal 202-225-5211
Ted Strickland 202-225-5705
Michael J. Rogers 202-225-4872
Tammy Baldwin 202-225-2906
Janice Schakowsky 202-225-2111
Tim Murphy 202-225-2301
Joseph R. Pitts 202-225-2411
Thomas H. Allen 202-225-6116

Strike a bell for liberty by calling the congressmen today and letting them know this is important to you.


WEDNESDAY ACTION UPDATE: WHAT YOU CAN DO TO SAVE THE INTERNET NOW

Today there's a key vote in the Energy and Commerce Committee on net neutrality and internet freedom. Our goal is to keep the vote close and show that there's public outrage about letting big companies control the internet. Here are four Democats on the Energy and Commerce Committee who are not totally wedded to the Telecoms. They can be convinced to vote with us if we apply some pressure. If you live in one of their districts, YOU can be key in saving the Internet.

Bart Stupak (D- Michigan, 1st, the western part on the other side of Lake Michigan + Petoskey and Alpena)
phone: (202) 225 4735
fax: (202) 225 4744

Tom Allen, (D - Maine, 1st, the southwestern part of the state that includes Portland and Augusta)
phone: (207) 774-5019
fax: (207) 871-0720

Mike Ross (D - Arkansas, 4th, the southern part of the state including Hot Spings, Pine Bluff, Mena, Hope and El Dorado)
tel: 1-800-223-2220
fax: (202) 225-1314

Jim Davis (D - Florida, 11th, Tampa and St. Petersburg but Davis will be attentive to ALL Floridians since he is leaving Congress and running for Governor)
tel: (202) 225-3376
fax: (202) 225-5652


WEDNESDAY AFTERNOON UPDATE: BETRAYED BY BOUGHT AND PAID FOR REPUBLICRATS

The Markey Amendment failed in committee 22-34. All the Democrats you called today voted against the Telecom monopolists. GREAT JOB! But corporate Democrats Bobby Rush (IL-01), Al Wynn (MD-04), Gene Green (TX-29) and Charlie Gonzales (TX-20) all voted no on the amendment and betrayed the netroots. Please don't forget these men's names; when we needed them desperately, they decided to stick with Joe Barton and abandon the netroots and progressives.

The fate of the Internet will now rest in the hands of the Republican-dominated Senate. I'll keep you updated. Oh, by the way, Matt at MyDD has done some great research and has come up with the amount the Telecom companies have bribed contributed to each of the Democrats who joined the Republicans today.

Ed Towns- $22,000
Al Wynn- $19,100
Charlie Gonzales- $16,500
Bobby Rush- $21,000
Gene Green- $12,000

IMPEACHMENT PROCEEDINGS-- SERIOUS ONES-- AGAINST BUSH ARE STARTING IN ILLINOIS

I bet you didn't know that impeachment proceedings against a president can be initiated by joint resoution of a state legislature. Not many people did. But with craven and cowardly (and comfy) Inside-the-Beltway Democratic non-leaders afraid of their own shadows and not even willing to back Russ Feingold's moderate censure resolution against the madman and tyrant, Illinois State Representative Karen Yarbrough got movin' on the never before utilized Section 603 of Jefferson's Manual of the Rules of the United States House of Representatives.

According to an article in OpEdNews.com this morning, Yarbrough's HJR0125 details "five specific charges against President Bush including one that is specified to be a felony... that the NSA was directed by the President to spy on American citizens without warrant." This puts Bush's rubber-stamp Republican Congress, which has adamantly refused to even investigate any of the charges against Bush that have been making more and more Americans disgrunted, in a very awkward position. "Should HJR0125 be passed by the Illinois General Assembly, the US House will be forced by House Rules to take up the issue of impeachment as a privileged bill, meaning it will take precedence over other House business."

Impeachment demands have been growing around the country on a grassroots level. "An ABC News/Washington Post Poll Conducted April 6-9 showed that 33% of Americans currently support Impeaching President Bush, coincidentally, only a similar amount supported impeaching Nixon at the start of the Watergate investigation. If and when Illinois HJR0125 hits the capitol and the individual charges are publicly investigated, that number is likely to grow rapidly. Combined with the very real likelihood that Rove is about to be indicted in the LeakGate investigation, and Bush is in real trouble beyond his plummeting poll numbers."

Below is the full resolution:

1 HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION

2 WHEREAS, Section 603 of Jefferson's Manual of the Rules of
3 the United States House of Representatives allows federal
4 impeachment proceedings to be initiated by joint resolution of
5 a state legislature; and

6 WHEREAS, President Bush has publicly admitted to ordering
7 the National Security Agency to violate provisions of the 1978
8 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, a felony, specifically
9 authorizing the Agency to spy on American citizens without
10 warrant; and

11 WHEREAS, Evidence suggests that President Bush authorized
12 violation of the Torture Convention of the Geneva Conventions,
13 a treaty regarded a supreme law by the United States
14 Constitution; and

15 WHEREAS, The Bush Administration has held American
16 citizens and citizens of other nations as prisoners of war
17 without charge or trial; and

18 WHEREAS, Evidence suggests that the Bush Administration
19 has manipulated intelligence for the purpose of initiating a
20 war against the sovereign nation of Iraq, resulting in the
21 deaths of large numbers of Iraqi civilians and causing the
22 United States to incur loss of life, diminished security and
23 billions of dollars in unnecessary expenses; and
24 WHEREAS, The Bush Administration leaked classified
25 national secrets to further a political agenda, exposing an
26 unknown number of covert U. S. intelligence agents to potential
27 harm and retribution while simultaneously refusing to
28 investigate the matter; and
29 WHEREAS, The Republican-controlled Congress has declined


HJ0125 - 2 - LRB094 20306 RLC 58347 r


1 to fully investigate these charges to date; therefore, be it
2 RESOLVED, BY THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF THE
3 NINETY-FOURTH GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, THE
4 SENATE CONCURRING HEREIN, that the General Assembly of the
5 State of Illinois has good cause to submit charges to the U. S.
6 House of Representatives under Section 603 that the President
7 of the United States has willfully violated his Oath of Office
8 to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United
9 States; and be it further

10 RESOLVED, That George W. Bush, if found guilty of the
11 charges contained herein, should be removed from office and
12 disqualified to hold any other office in the United States.

AFTERNOON DELIGHT UPDATE: CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE GETS IMPEACHMENT BILL TOO-- FOR BUSH AND HIS CROOKED, HATED VICE-PRESIDENT

We're #2, we're #2! L.A. Assemblyman Paul Koretz has submitted amendments to Assembly Joint Resolution No. 39, calling for the impeachment of Bush and Cheney. Koretz says his resolution "bases the call for impeachment upon the Bush Administration intentionally misleading the Congress and the American people regarding the threat from Iraq in order to justify an unnecessary war that has cost billions of dollars and thousands of lives and casualties; exceeding constitutional authority to wage war by invading Iraq; exceeding constitutional authority by Federalizing the National Guard; conspiring to torture prisoners in violation of the 'Federal Torture Act' and indicating intent to continue such actions; spying on American citizens in violation of the 1978 Foreign Agency Surveillance Act; leaking and covering up the leak of the identity of Valerie Plame Wilson, and holding American citizens without charge or trial."

NEW YORK CONGRESSIONAL VICTORIES COULD BRING THE DEMOCRATS 6 SEATS-- THOUGH I DON'T SEE WHY 7 OR 8 ISN'T AS REALISTIC

Last night someone sent me a note saying I should try being nice to Hillary because (obviously alluding to this article) she is going to help the Democrats recapture the House of Representatives in November by helping sweep 6 rubber-stamp Republicans out of office in New York. OK, this is how nice I can be to Hillary: she's better than a Republican. I can't be nicer than that without flirting with obfuscation.

Although Democrats hold 20 of the 29 seats currently, I am happy that someone thinks they stand a chance to pick up half a dozen GOP-held seats in the state, possibly taking seats currently occupied by rubber-stamp hacks John Sweeney, Sherwood Boehlert, Randy Kuhl, Tom Reynolds, James Walsh, and Sue Kelly. It should be 7. It isn't 7 because one of the slimy Democratic insiders helping to plot Hillary's run for the White House was too busy making vicious war against grassroots and progressive Democrats to have noticed that arguably the most vulnerable of all the rubber-stamp Republicans in New York State-- the last Republican congressman on Long Island-- had no challenger. Isn't that part of the chairman of the DCCC's job? I mean, instead of knifing good solid Democrats like Christine Cegelis, Dave Lutrin, Paul Hackett and dozens of others in the backs, shouldn't Rahm Emanuel have been making sure-- recruiting, which all his lame apologists say he's so good at-- - that Peter King would have a challenger prepared for the Democratic tsunami? The filing deadline isn't until mid-July so let's hope that someone jumps in on this race. Last year's two "most likely," State Representative Davis Bishop and Nassau County Legislator Dave Mejias have both demurred.

Normally Democrats are more likely to not run someone in a deep red district filled with KKK members and brainwashed religionist fanatics waiting for the End of Times. I grew up in NY-03 and this is not that kind of a district. It is a classically moderate suburban district, the kind where Democrats have been making gigantic headway in recent years, particularly in 2005 when Democrats swept these kinds of areas in New Jersey and Virginia. This mostly Nassau County district includes Long Beach, Levittown, Lindenhurst, Glen Cove, Hicksville. Despite the Republican registration advantage, it's anything but a GOP lock. In 2004 King's Democratic challenger, Blair Mathies, had no discernible help from the DCCC or the local Democratic Party but garnered around 60,000 votes. King won with 63% while Bush was beating Kerry 52% to 47%. (The Republican voter registration edge has eroded lately but was still a hefty 63,000 in 2005.)

Right now it looks like Dave Denenberg, a somewhat tainted Nassau County legislator whose own conviction on an election misdemeanor will probably keep him from effectively nailing Peter King on his ties to the pervasive Republican Culture of Corruption in DC, will be the best the Democrats' can come up with. If you click on that link you'll have to take my word that he's a Democrat since not only does it not say so on the site, but when you click on the heading "Political Party," it is conspicuously blank, although if you look closely you may see a small jackass' head on the upper left corner of the page.

Or maybe it could have been 8, since NY-13 has a 60,000 Democratic voter registration advantage and the rubber-stamp incumbent, Vito Fossella, could be defeated by a strong, well-financed, straight-talking Democrat. The putative challenger, Steve Harrison, has no website, no campaign I have seen any evidence of, and appears to be hoping that anti-Republican sentiment grows so strong that anyone who is not a Republican will be swept into office. I was on a conference call a couple weeks ago with the architects of that abysmal strategy-- although neither as extreme as Harrison appears to be-- and listening to them (Rahm Emanuel and Chuck Schumer) made me understand why Democrats have gone from the majority party to a party that can't believe in itself enough to grasp the diamond crown when it's being handed to them on a silver solid gold platter. Fossella is pure rubber stamp and completely involved with all the sleaze and garbage represented by Tom DeLay, Roy Blunt and John Boehner, but unless a Democrat is out there making the case, Fossella will walk into his 6th miserable term of misrepresenting Staten Island and a slice of Brooklyn.

So thanks Hill (and, of course, Spitzer) for doing your best to serve your own interests and in the process turning out lots of Democrats who may vote for Dems further down the ticket. Are there any actual leaders in the New York Democratic Party though?

(I'll get to the good news-- the Democrats who look like their own efforts against Republicans in some upstate districts-- over the next couple of weeks.)

LUNCH WITH RUSS FEINGOLD

It was kind of last minute and ad hoc but today Russ Feingold invited half a dozen L.A. bloggers to come meet him at a restaurant and have lunch and ask him any questions on our minds. I know Russ' policy positions already and I've already given him a big thumbs up and even opened an ACT BLUE Page for his Progressive Patriots political action committee. So what I was looking for was a sense of the man. I got it.

He seemed sincere, committed, open-minded on the one hand while passionate about what he believes in most on the other. He didn't use any Beltway jargon; he seemed like a real straight shooter (unlike his pal McCain).

If you're a DWT regular, you are no doubt aware of how strongly I feel about the careerist politicians in the Democratic Inside-the-Beltway Establishment. If you're new to DWT I will just say that people like Rahm Emanuel and Chuck Schumer seem like only a step or two ahead of Tom DeLay and Bill Frist on the evolutionary scale and almost as advanced as a duck-billed platypus. I didn't think Feingold would fit into that mold and I was relieved to see that he didn't. Not at all. In fact, he mentioned, when questioned about how Schumer and Emanuel conspired to destroy Paul Hackett's senatorial run in Ohio, that he took a meeting with Hackett and wrote him a substantial check to help him retire his campaign debt. Feingold seemed genuinely unhappy about how that whole mess came down and how it would reflect on a political party that is supposed to be different from the weak, ethicless, treacherous Republicans.

It was interesting that he thinks the crimes committed by Bush probably rise to the level of being "impeachable," but that he feels that the responsible thing to do at this point is to foster the idea of accountability through his very moderate censure resolution. And although he mentioned that several senators-- above and beyond public supporters like Harkin, Boxer and Kerry-- have told him privately that they would support him, it looks like a long, hard slog before this is going to get through the Senate. Long, hard slogs don't scare Russ Feingold and never have.

"This administration," he told us, "doesn't know how to govern the country. But they are brilliant at intimidating Democrats." Obviously, they don't intimidate him at all. He speaks his mind because he believes in his core values and principles. Voters sense that. When Kerry, whose public perception was wishy-washy and someone with a weak value-system, squeaked by to a 10,000 vote victory in Wisconsin, Feingold's far more progressive and outspoken positions garnered him a 300,000 vote victory, despite an avalanche of right-wing money pouring into the unfathomably filthy campaign against him. But it wasn't really about the policy positions per se. It was about the man and how he makes decisions and what he's made of.

I walked into today's meeting admiring Russ Feingold. I walked out feeling even more strongly that this is a real leader that the Democratic Party is lucky to have-- someone who isn't Joe Biden or Hillary Clinton, let alone Joe Lieberman. He may not be as glib and showy, but he's what a lot of us were once hoping Barack Obama would turn out to be.


MONDAY MORNING UPDATE: OTHER VIEWS

A couple of fellow-bloggers who also met with Feingold Saturday, Brad Friedman from BradBlog, Pam and Steve from SteveAudio and R.J. Eskow over at Huff Po have posted their perspectives on our meeting. Take a look.

JUST WHAT DWT READERS NEED FOR A SATURDAY AFTERNOON

I'm going out today to meet Senator Russ Feingold. I'll report back later. Meanwhile, here's a short and wonderful little film you could watch while I'm away. You'll think it was made about the Bush Regime-- until you see it was actually made in 1946! Wow-- were they prescient! Mags sent it to me and Redneck Mother got it from King of Zembia. Who you gonna send it to?

THIS IS OUR COUNTRY-- JOHN MELLENCAMP HAS A NEW SONG FOR A POST-BUSH ERA

In the last couple of weeks I've written some stories about Neil Young's next album, LIVING WITH WAR. You've probably learned by now that Neil and Reprise Records have decided to stream, the album, free of charge, starting next week (April 28) at NeilYoung.com, preceding the release of the physical album (which they are rushing out into the market as fast as they can; best guestimate: mid-May). Meanwhile more lyrics are made available everyday at NeilYoung.com/

Today I noticed that Neil had put up the words to one of my favorite songs on the album, "Lookin' For A Leader," a very positive and forward-looking track that will certainly give Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and Colin Powell supporters pause for thought. I like the healing quality of the way Neil put the song together and, Lord knows, after all the divisiveness of this chicken-without-a-head Bush Regime, healing is exactly what we need. Judging by the scores of vicious, and mostly unprintable, comments I've had about "Let's Impeach The President" from Bush deadenders, that isn't a song that will heal the divisiveness Karl Rove has so carefully and effectively crafted. "Lookin' For A Leader," though, could help move the country into the right head space.

But Neil isn't the only high-profile, respected artist writing songs along these lines. A few weeks ago I mentioned that Neil's pals The Dixie Chicks are back with a great new song "Not Ready To Make Nice". Artists young and old have been looking at what the Bush Regime has been up, feeling revulsion and expressing that revulsion in songs. Green Day's AMERICAN IDIOT has joined the ranks of one of the best selling albums of all times, not just in the U.S., but everywhere in the free-ish world. Bruce Springsteeen fans know about his deep and on-going concerns and about his latest endeavors in this direction. The other day I watched a live acoustic video from Pink and in the introduction she mentions that her new song, "Dear Mr. President," is "one of the most important songs I've ever written." Watch it here. Flea, the beloved Red Hot Chili Peppers bass player wrote a great e-mail to Atrios that I suggest everyone read.

Now a few weeks ago I did a little story about how singer/songwriter/painter/social activist John Mellencamp was rumored to be thinking about tossing his hat into electoral politics. A mutual friend called me and told me that Mellencamp got a chuckle about the idea but that it's not true. He's not running for governor of Indiana or for any other office. End of story. But certainly not the end of Mellencamp's social activism.

If you were lucky enough to have seen any of the shows on his recent concert tour, "The Words and Music Tour," you know he started every show with a song that has never appeared on any of his albums, a song he wrote recently-- and will probably record in the future-- called "This Is Our Country." It's the kind of song that will help bind together that which has been so violently torn asunder by Bush, Cheney, Rove and the vicious partisan and self-serving brutes that make up the bandit Regime that has gotten its hands-- through hook and crook-- on the levers of power in America.

I can stand beside
Things I think are right
And I can stand beside
The idea of stand and fight
And I do believe
There’s a dream for everyone
This is our country
From the east coast
To the west coast
Down the Dixie Highway
Back home
This is our country

There's room enough here
For science to live
And there's room enough here
For religion to forgive
And try to understand
The other people of this world
This is our country
From the east coast
To the west coast
Down the Dixie Highway
Back home
This is our country
 
That poverty could be
Just another ugly thing
And bigotry could be
Seen only as obscene
And the ones that run this land
Will help the poor and common man
This is our country
From the east coast
To the west coast
Down the Dixie Highway
Back home
This is our country
 
The dream will never leave
And some day it will come true
And it’s up to me and you
To do the best that we can do
And let the voice of freedom
Sing out through this land
This is our country
From the east coast
To the west coast
Down the Dixie Highway
Back home
This is our country

Another Hollywood librul for Fox and the Republican Noise Machine to swiftboat? Hardly. They can try all they like but John Mellencamp was born, raised and still lives with his family in Indiana. He's a blue collar rocker who puts his money where his mouth is, not just with Farm Aid, but on a day-to-day basis.

In April, in the middle of his tour, he played the brand new repulsively-named "U.S. Cellular Coliseum" in Bloomington, Illinois. Working men and women from the Central Illinois Organizing Project contacted him before the tour to let him know about their effort to get city workers a "living wage."
The organization, which covers 12 central Illinois counties, calculates a living wage as the hourly wage necessary to maintain a standard one-bedroom apartment where the rent does not exceed 30% of a person's income. The living wage for Bloomington is around $9.58 per hour, according to the National Low-Income Housing Coalition. (The Coliseum workers are paid $6.75/hour.)

I guess an alternative is that Republicans can continue to turn a blind eye on "illegal immigrants" to swamp the country's labor markets so their greed-obsessed financial backers can continue to deny the whole concept of a "living wage."

Mellencamp's response to the workers? "It's only right that working people in this country earn a living wage. It's just basic to the value system that is part of being an American," said Mellencamp, who met personally with some of the workers before he went on stage and then dedicated "Jackie Brown" to them, telling the audience "We need to help each other as much as we can." If Barack Obama and other Beltway Democrats are having trouble figuring out what Democratic values are, they should ask Mellencamp-- and anyone else who doesn't make a career out of partisan politics.

Note on the art: Everyone I've shown Mellencamp's lyrics to has had a great reaction, although, of course, no two responses are identical. Adam, our Art Director, may have been a little drunk, but he got to work immediately putting his powerful feelings to work to express how he felt about Mellencamp's song. Sophie and Sadie both think he went a little over the top but they've never gotten past "Jack and Diane" and "Pink Houses" being played for hours on end by Sophie's son the school teacher.

IS JIM PEDERSON OF ARIZONA THE MAN WHO COULD SWING CONTROL OF THE SENATE TO THE DEMOCRATS?

The country is sick of the Bush Regime and the rubber-stamp Republican Congress. Even with the gross incompetence and egregiously brand-killing activities of the Inside-the-Beltway Democrats, who are, after all, almost as horrible as the Republicans, the country clearly yearns for a change in November. That change could be a landslide victory for Democrats, especially in the House, and especially if there are enough Democratic House candidates to tell Rahm Emanuel to stick his anti-progressive, Republican-lite ideas up where the sun don't shine. Emanuel and Hoyer and the consistently incompetent loser consultants the Democratic Establishment always hires are aiming for 15 seats to give them the power that comes along with majority status. Their game plan is narrow and pathetic and a loser strategy based on suppressing controversy instead of embracing it and exploiting Republican weakness.

Last night I heard Markos from Kos-- like is there another Markos?-- speak and he and Jerome (from MyDD) said a lot of cool stuff. My favorite was when Markos quoted the "once-relevent" James Carville saying that "when your enemy is drowning, throw him an anvil." DCCC-controlled candidates around the country, as opposed to independent-minded, grassroots, progressive Democrats, have something big in common-- no talk about Iraq on their campaign websites. Many, like the quintessential DCCC hack Baron Hill (running against one of the 3 or 4 most vulnerable Republican loons in the House, Michael Sodrel), only with the greatest reluctance even include any kind of an issues page at all and then only the most generalized mom-and-apple-pie crap imaginable. This is the kind of bullshit that seems to prove right-wing assertions that Democrats don't stand for anything-- even more than Barack Obama's come-back that "That isn't true; Democrats do stand for anything."

If you want to see issues, ideas and passion from Democratic candidates just look at the websites of the Democratic candidates that the DCCC is fighting against. Most of them have been driven out of their races already to make room for Emanuel's hand-picked, bland, stand-for-nothing shills. A few are still standing-- like Jerry McNerney (CA-11), Gretchen Clearwater (IN-09), Jan Schneider (FL-13)-- but the Beltway Insiders are working mightily to dispatch them asap, just the way they did to Paul Hackett in his Ohio senatorial bid.

Ah... the Senate. That's actually what I wanted to write about when I cranked up the ole Mac just now. Chuck Schumer's DSCC might be as bad as the DCCC and no one thinks they really have much of a chance to take control. In Schumer's lame, overly-cautious strategy, if everything goes right, they will keep all the incumbents in office and hold on to the open-seats where Democrats (+ Jeffords of Vermont) are retiring. Both those worthy goals seem doable at this point. They should also be able to take Republican seats in Pennsylvania (Santorum), Montana (Burns), Rhode Island (Chafee) and Missouri (Talent). That's not enough for control.

Last night the brilliant and articulate Norman Lear told a small gathering in his living room that people should consider helping Ned Lamont defeat Bush's favorite Democrat, GOP-enabler Joe Lieberman of Connecticut. Lear pointed out that if Lamont manages to get his message out to Democrats and wins the August 8 primary we would be gaining a Democrat in the Senate. I couldn't agree more, but when it comes to winning the kind of control to make the Democrats the majority party in the Senate-- the party that can put the brakes on Bush's disastrous agenda to destroy the middle class and tear up the social contract that binds our nation together-- that still leaves the Democrats a couple of votes short. Where to look?

Well at one time Ohio seemed like a sure thing. But that was before Schumer-- with a little help from the always foul Boss Emanuel-- called all Paul Hackett's financial backers and told them-- in no uncertain terms-- to stop funding his campaign, thereby alienating God-only-knows how many Democrats from the process when Hackett quit the race. Suddenly Democratic polling numbers sank and a race that seemed to be within easy grasp of either Sherrod Brown or Paul Hackett, was now swinging back into safe GOP hands. I think this one is still winnable, but a lot tougher than it would have been without the Inside-the-Beltway, Tom Delay-like, Stalinist interference.

So where else? Tennessee, where arch crook Bill Frist is resigning to pursue a doomed run for the presidency and then to enjoy the fruits of his ill-gotten gains-- his family wealth having increased exponentially while he was in control of, and manipulating relevant legislation in, the Senate, doesn't look like fertile ground for Harold Ford. Ford is a bland, Republican-lite Democrat who can attract some independents but may fail to inspire progressives with his Lieberman-like positions. My bet would be that the Repugs hold onto this seat. Same in increasingly moderate Virginia, where radical right George Allen seems incongruously popular for either of the 2 moderate Democrats, Harris Miller or James Webb, to overtake by November. That leaves 2 long shots: Arizona and Nevada.

in Nevada, the Democrats have Jimmy Carter's son, Jack, in against John Ensign and, although not impossible if there is a Democratic tsunami, it isn't a race I'd want to bet the ranch on. I might would have said a similar thing about Jim Pederson in his race against the increasingly vulnerable Jon Kyle-- until today. Today Pederson decided to go for the jugular and started running television spots attacking the total rubber-stamp/corporate pawn Kyl where he's weakest-- the immigration issue, which is HUGE in Arizona. Despite some encouraging poll results (from a questionable poll), Pederson looked to me like a hopeless insider burdened down with the loser consultants telling him exactly what to do to guarantee a loss-- albeit a respectably close one (Democratic consultants' specialty; Republicans fire consultants who lose, unlike Democrats).

By taking a bold step away from Bush and his handmaiden Kyl, who cares not a whit for his Arizona constituents and has consistently served the interests only of his corporate bribers demanding cheap labor in order to hold down wages and eviscerate organized labor, Pederson is making this into a real race-- one that could see the Democrats stumble blindly into control of the U.S. Senate.

It appears that Chimpy Bush is finally beginning to get some recognition for the truly historic nature of his presidency

I don't think anyone can accuse DownWithTyranny of being slow to recognize the historic dimension of the Chimpy Bush presidency. Howie has never been shy about describing Chimpy as the worst president in U.S. history.

Now it appears that the rest of the world may be catching up. Princeton historian Sean Wilentz' blistering new Rolling Stone cover story is headlined: "The Worst President in History?"

Personally, I have a sentimental fondness for Warren G. Harding, who set a standard of sorts for not giving a good goddamn about the country's business, while making the kit and caboodle available for plundering. Still, even with the eternal X factor of Harding's death in office, so that we can never know for sure to what depths his administration might have sunk, I have to admit that his claims to supremacy pale beside our Chimpy's.

After all, wasn't the whole purpose of this presidency to turn the country over to a nest of the vilest, most brutal, sociopathic, psychopathic and megalomaniacal gangs bestriding the nation? It was just a bonus that Chimpy himself rose above his role as Supreme Tool to add to the mix a whole catastrophic dimension of messianic lunacy, cretinism and viciousness.

There is some small comfort for those of us who have been dismissed by more "sensible" and "balanced" and "responsible" commentators as "extremists" and "Bush-haters" and "Bush-bashers." Since, say, the second or third year of Chimpy's presidency, once we had a chance to take a proper reckoning of the man and the people driving his presidency, it has seemed to me that anyone who doesn't loathe George W. Bush and everything he stands for and everyone who stands with him is mentally and morally incompetent.

Here's how Professor Wilentz launches his consideration:

George W. Bush's presidency appears headed for colossal historical disgrace. Barring a cataclysmic event on the order of the terrorist attacks of September 11th, after which the public might rally around the White House once again, there seems to be little the administration can do to avoid being ranked on the lowest tier of U.S. presidents. And that may be the best-case scenario. Many historians are now wondering whether Bush, in fact, will be remembered as the very worst president in all of American history.

THE HONEYMOON IS OVER AND UNCLE SAM IS CHASING US AROUND THE HOUSE-- AND THE GUN IS LOADED

THE MYTHS OF OUR LIVES

As human beings, we tend to compose myths about the important events in our lives. We turn the stories of our lives into shorter, happier versions of reality. It is healthy, for the most part, and performs a function. It helps us to make meaning of our lives….to tell the stories. Mommy fell in love with daddy at first sight. It matters very little if that is literally what happened if mommy is still madly in love with daddy today or we can teach some lesson by telling it that way.

We have national myths and cultural myths and religious myths which we hand down from one generation to the next. They are, by and large, told to our children to give them a sense of continuity and meaning. America is all about freedom, we are the smartest and best, and Jesus loves me. We seem to be able to live with the fact that most of what we believe is not literally so. It is a feeling, an ambiance if you will that we are creating around our collective experiences.

Problems arise as problems will, when we move into the extremes, when we invest our myths with more meaning or veracity than they can safely embody. For example, when domestic violence erupts, too many women cling to the myth that he will change. Or, when one abuses their children, they tell themselves that they are doing it for the child’s good. We ought to be more skeptical of ourselves. Maybe it is time to edit our stories.

On a personal level, we experience difficulty when we refuse to alter our myths. We suffer depression and symptoms of our denial become manifest in the oddest of ways. We drink too much, we can't sleep. We lie.

Nationally, we are no less likely to hold fast to falsehoods. It is good for a people to have pride in their country, maybe even necessary. But, it is better to believe in ourselves as people rather than using our energies to uphold illusions. No matter how we try to hide it, national denial shows. The myth is wearing thin, people lie. They smile and deny the truth, get high on patriotism and back slapping. Avert your eyes, and you won’t see as much.

Even though George Bush has an approval rating under 40%, many cling to the national myth of his popularity. In regions like mine, people stubbornly refuse to believe anything except that George is God's agent. They deny the corruption, the deception, and the incompetence. They have difficulty accepting that their party of responsibility has run up the highest deficit in our history, we have lost face in the world, we torture and we have a president who lies with impunity. Even though they are losing their jobs, some still refuse to admit that Republican policies have failed them.

There is a disturbing rhetoric that goes with the failure of our myths. The more our myths are failing us the more we spin a web of the sacred around them, the more desperate our situation, the more we describe it in glowing terms. We exaggerate the smallest bit of decency into a monumental victory of character. A battered woman will explain that yes, her husband does chase her through the house with the gun, but it is not loaded. At least he works and brings home the bacon, he does not cheat on her. The husband of an alcoholic will admit his wife has a drink now and then to calm her nerves, her days are stressful. The child abusers believe that if they spare the rod, they spoil the child, whatever platitude will work to warn people away from the truth. We got a million of 'em. The more emotionally charged, the greater the distance between myth and reality. If we can bring God or country or "family values" into the mix, that best of all.

The denial we live with on a personal level costs us something. Sometimes, it is minor. But, sometimes it costs us a child or a husband or wife our lives. Sometimes we make others pay by not facing our own problems. Consider drunken drivers, or even those who snap and kill others because the strength of their myth crumbled one day in the face of their reality. We are not strangers to betrayal.

Nationally, we are reeling under the weight of the myths we've told ourselves since 9-11. We told ourselves that we were united, when millions of Americans were shamed into silence and their love of their country was questioned because they did not think the Iraq war was the war to fight. We are reeling under the weight of the lies, the war profiteering, the abandonment of our own in crisis and the abandonment of our troops who lack body armor these several years past their deployment. We are in denial when we dismiss ideas that we are not meeting the needs of returning troops. We are in denial over our national debt of over 9 trillion dollars. And, we pretend like the improved economy for the rich is helping us in the middle as we lose good paying jobs and see increases in our own taxes.

We put on our national sunglasses and lie to the neighbors. The media refuses to hold Bush and his people accountable for outing an agent of the United States government or for exposing an agency which was monitoring WMDs worldwide. Our officials increasingly describe the nation in glowing terms. One gets an eerie sense that their tether to reality is completely severed. We feel a bit sick to our stomach, something is wrong. We close the curtains and deny. We shame and threaten those who would tell on us. The denial is costing us. The pressure is mounting. The faces of news casters and pundits are twisted into the oddest expressions as they repeat over and over obvious lies and excuses and lob softballs.

We have come to the place where we call black white and up down. If the country were in a 12 step program our peers would be calling us on the carpet over the depth of our denial and lies. Our sponsor would throw in the towel.

The faithful deniers come on very strong these days. Just this week I was told that George Bush is God's agent, and that it is just plain wrong to question him. If you are going to name drop, it gets no better than God. As a nation we need counseling to leave our abusive husband, a support group, or anti-psychotics. Bring 'em on.

Here's the truth, folks. We have religious groups suing for the right to engage in hate speech against gays and protesting at military funerals. Our military generals are one by one speaking out in an unprecedented effort to put the brakes on an administration out of control. We have congressional leaders indicted for corruption claiming to be victims of religious persecution. George Bush is mentioning the unmentionable, nuclear option. Please note: there is no such thing as a nuclear war! There is however, nuclear annihilation. No matter how we close our eyes and plug our ears, we must admit global warming is for real. Clinging to our collective myths is costing us. Uncle Sam is chasing us around the house, and the gun IS loaded.

Let's start working through our "issues." Let's just get honest about it and leave the tall tales for less significant matters. Let's save the myths of our lives for children's books. We can keep enough honesty in them to be accurate and enough romance in them to be compelling, but whatever we do, let us tell ourselves the true national story as we gather in conference rooms, news rooms, restaurants, town halls, and even in living rooms. Let's embrace reality. Face it, the honeymoon is over, our love is unrequited, and we have been had.

-Mags

Confidential to our Rummy: We all just love the "Henny Penny" shtick, but soon your fans won't let you do your act without it

I also saw—and loved—the Henny Penny mini-collage from our Rummy which Jon Stewart presented on last night's Daily Show.

Now, our Rummy is a superbly polished entertainer, but I just want to be sure he's considered the long-term implications when audiences come to identify a piece of business too closely with a performer. Eventually, there's the risk that they just won't let go. You know, like the way the Rolling Stones can't get up onstage anywhere, even now that they're pushing 100, without audiences demanding to hear "Satisfaction." Or the way former Attorney General "Honest John" Ashcroft can't appear anyplace without the fans demanding that he warble "Let the Eagle Soar."

Just imagine some time in the future—and it's looking dishearteningly far in the the future—when Rummy is finally pried out of the Pentagon and takes his club act on the road for lounge audiences in Peoria and Little Rock (or alternatively for $250K-a-pop corporate butt-lickers). The seedy club manager (or seedy Corporate Communications Director) introduces him, and he barely gets out his opening "A funny thing happened to me on the way to obliterate Iraq . . ." when a fan who has perhaps started celebrating our Rummy's appearance a little early shouts out, "What about Henny Penny?" Then, from the other side of the room, comes a shout of "Hey, dude, the sky is falling!" It's just a matter of time before the mood turns grim and the whole audience is shouting rhythmically, "DO HENNY PENNY! DO HENNY PENNY!"

And there he'll be: our Rummy, a prisoner of his own comic genius. He'll be wanting to move on to new material, like about the time he decided to obliterate Iran—"no, not Iraq, IRAN," he'll say with an exasperated chuckle, and he'll have them rolling in the aisles, but not until the diehard fans allow him to introduce new material. Wherever he goes, he'll always know that it's just a matter of time before a member of his adoring public hisses, "We wanna hear friggin' Henny Penny."

It could get ugly, Rummy. Don't ever say we didn't warn you.

BELIEVE ME, YOU DON'T WANT TO BE A WOMAN IN IRAQ UNDER GEORGE BUSH'S RULE-- WORSE THAN UNDER SADDAM!

Saddam Hussein was a brutal, genocidal tyrant-- far more primitive in his butchery than more technologically-advanced tyrants. The degree of suffering, misery and despair he caused to so many, particularly the independence-minded Kurds, has no ameliorative. That said, Saddam's tyranny was pretty much one-size-fits-all, at least when it came to gender. He didn't discriminate against women. In fact, in certain ways, women faired better in Saddam's Iraq than they do in most Arab countries. In terms of rights and opportunities, Iraqi women had far more in common with women in Turkey, Israel and Europe than they did with women in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Oman or the other feudal uber-reactionary regimes Bush has tied U.S. Middle East policy to-- or than they do under the U.S. puppet regimes in Afghanistan or... Iraq.

In the summer of 2005 Pam's House Blend was already warning that the new Iraqi constitution was institutionalizing the disintegration of women's rights and putting Iraqi law in regard to gender back into the Middle Ages.

American reactionaries have never supported any rights except property rights and women have had to fight against vicious and concerted entrenched ideologues and bigots for whatever they have achieved-- from judicial rights to voting rights to all kinds of equality and, of course, for the once-again embattled right to choice. So only an imbecile wouldn't have found it just a tad ironic when Bush and Rumsfeld were running around bemoaning and then celebrating the plight of Iraqi women before and after the fall of Saddam. Of course is was all as much a charade as Bush's whole horrible time in office has been.

Today's SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER carried a piece by Bonnie Erbe called 'United States Is No Help To Iraqi Women".

It may be hard for normal Americans to grasp-- and it will certainly be galling for rabid right-wing loons to even read-- but "A new poll of leaders of Iraqi women's-rights groups finds that women were treated better and their civil rights were more secure under deposed President Saddam Hussein than under the faltering and increasingly sectarian U.S.-installed government."

The Integrated Regional Information Networks, a U.N. news agency covering sub-Saharan Africa, eight countries in central Asia, and Iraq, reported that "... women's basic rights under the Hussein regime were guaranteed in the constitution and more importantly respected, with women often occupying important government positions. Now, although their rights are still enshrined in the national constitution, activists complain that, in practice, they have lost almost all of their rights." Iraqi women are now under the power of superstitious, reactionary, women hating/fearing fasco-religionist maniacs-- just like their goal is for American women.

RUMSFELD REACTS-- "HENNY PENNY, THE SKY IS FALLING"-- AS IRAQ SPENDING GOES THROUGH THE ROOF

Today's WASHINGTON POST has a disturbing article by Jonathan Weisman which points out that Bush's occupation of Iraq has climbed from an annual $48 billion in 2003 to an anticipated $94 billion in 2006. The U.S. government is now spending nearly $10 billion a month in Iraq and Afghanistan. "Annual war costs in Iraq are easily outpacing the $61 billion a year that the United States spent in Vietnam between 1964 and 1972, in today's dollars. The invasion's 'shock and awe' of high-tech laser-guided bombs, cruise missiles and stealth aircraft has long faded, but the costs of even those early months are just coming into view as the military confronts equipment repair and rebuilding costs it has avoided and procurement costs it never expected."

Disturbing enough-- especially in light of how this is bankrupting the U.S. and wrecking the economy-- but what the POST article does not go into is even more disturbing. How much of this uptick in unforeseen (the keyword to all things Bush) spending is legitimate and how much of it is due to a sense that the war profiteers-- who, after all, know how to read a poll as well as anyone-- are getting that the party is nearly over? From the Bush Family and Cheney right down to Halliburton, Bechtel and the lowliest, shadiest little GOP-connected "defense contractors," whether it be the ones kicking back to Pete Sessions or to Jerry Lewis, Duke Cunningham, Jerry Lewis, Katherine Harris, Virgil Goode, Jr., Duncan Hunter, John Doolittle or any of dozens of crooked, bribe-taking congressmen, everyone is starting to get the feeling that whatever they don't grab and stuff into their pockets (and off-shore bank accounts) now is going to be nothing but a missed opportunity.

Last night I stayed up late and watch THE DAILY SHOW. Stewart has current and older videos of Rumsfeld dismissing legitimate concerns about how he is running the war with a scoffing, mocking "henny, penny; the sky is falling." Resignation should not be the discussion for Rumsfeld. A trial is what should be on the agenda.

Oh, and while we're talking about trials for war profiteers, yesterday's Paul Krugman column, "Enemy of the Planet," got me thinking. What about all the corporate managers who have seen fit to reward themselves with hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars while destroying the financial and economic foundations of our country? They're part of the Bush catastrophe too-- every bit as much as Rumsfeld-- and they too deserve their day in court. "Lee Raymond, the former chief executive of Exxon Mobil, was paid $686 million over 13 years. But that’s not a reason to single him out for special excoriation. Executive compensation is out of control in corporate America as a whole, and unlike other grossly overpaid business leaders, Mr. Raymond can at least claim to have made money for his stockholders. There’s a better reason to excoriate Mr. Raymond: for the sake of his company’s bottom line, and perhaps his own personal enrichment, he turned Exxon Mobil into an enemy of the planet."

WILL PETE SESSIONS BE THE NEXT REPUBLICROOK JOINING "DUKE" CUNNINGHAM IN THE HOOSEGOW?

How bad is Texas Congressman Pete Sessions for America? Let me answer that. He's as bad as can be. And we're probably stuck with him until he's hauled away to prison like his fellow extreme right pal Randy "Duke" Cunningham. Based on an objective analysis of his voting record, he's the 8th most reactionary congressman-- out of 433. You can't find a single issue where his voting record even approaches the mainstream. Pete Sessions is the definition of an extreme right wing fanatic. He is also a weak and corrupt man and this morning Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) filed a Department of Justice complaint against him for official actions he took on behalf of convicted Republican lobbyist Jack Abramoff, and for the bribes he raked in from a San Francisco defense technology company, Promia.

Sessions is widely viewed as one of the most corrupt and sleazy of Texas' less-than-stellar congressional delegation. He took thousands of dollars from the most contemptible criminals working the U.S. Congress, aside from Abramoff, over $25,000 from DeLay, over $10,000 from DeLay henchman Roy Blunt, as well as substantial funds from the now imprisoned Cunningham and the soon to be imprisoned Bob Ney, as well as over $10,000 from Big Tobacco's Congressional bagman, John Boehner. He is considered to be the most rubber-stamp of congressmen in the entire rubber-stamp Texas delegation-- and, now that DeLay is gone, the most corrupt. He has a long sordid history of conflicts of interest-- instances where our nation's and his constituents' interests were never allowed to get in the way of his own financial interests.

The specifics of the CREW complaints don't involve the pay-offs from the big telecom corporations that he's usually associated with. This is more about his complicity in the criminality with which Abramoff and DeLay built the mighty edifice known as the Republican Culture of Corruption-- stealing millions from Indian tribes to feed DeLay's vast crime syndicate. Sessions used his influence on two equally corrupt former Bush cabinet members, John Ashcroft and Gale Norton, to benefit a Louisiana Indian tribe, clients of Abramoff. Sessions was paid over $20,000 for his services. This is called bribery. It's illegal and it is the reason it is likely that Sessions will be joining his good pal Cunningham behind bars in the not too distant future.

Aside from accepting bribes from the Louisiana Indians, Sessions was the GOP point person for bribes coming from Malaysia, an on-going multi-year project he worked on with Abramoff, Michael Scanlon and Tony Rudy, 3 confessed, convicted criminals/lobbyists, as well as crooked California politician Dana Rohrbacher.

Part of the Republican Culture of Corruption involved getting trusted lieutenants hired into firms doing "business" with the Republican Party's illicit operations. Adrian Plesha, a right-wing hack of dubious talents (and a guilty plea in a Federal Elections Commission case), had been Sessions' trusted communications director when he suddenly got a very cush sinecure as a VP in charge of Washington, DC for a San Francisco-based defense contractor, Promia. Working with another ultra-shady Republican congressman, Curt Weldon of Pennsylvania, Sessions was able to enrich his new pals at Promia to the tune of approximately $10 million dollars in taxpayer money. In return Sessions got oodles of kickbacks from Promia executives as well as $30,000 direct from the company. Since 2000 Sessions collected at least $55,000 from Promia-- the largest contribution the company ever made to any member of Congress ever. They must have really thought he was a swell dude.

The very gerrymandered 32nd congressional district is a basically suburban and exurban district north of Dallas up to Richardson and west of Dallas into Irving but not as far as Ft. Worth. It was designed to elect Republicans to Congress. If Sessions is hauled off to prison between now and November, it is possible that the moderate Democrat who is running against him, Will Pryor, a Dallas native who is a cousin of Arkansas Senator Mark Pryor, will be elected. But in the 32nd CD, there are no guarantees.

BUSH'S ANSWER TO NEIL-- A NEW VERSION OF JOHN LENNON'S "IMAGINE"

Bush isn't exactly a singer in the traditional sense; he's more a rapper. And here he is taking on John Lennon's anthem, Imagine. Worth a listen (with video, of course).

NEIL YOUNG IS LIVING WITH WAR. CAN HE RESCUE AMERICA, AND THE REST OF THE WORLD, FROM IT?

Until a few years ago I was president of Reprise Records, a label whose historical roster is really amazing-- from Frank Sinatra, Jimi Hendrix, Eric Clapton, Joni Mitchell to Green Day, Depeche Mode, The Smiths and... the point of this story, Neil Young. Now I'm retired from business and I live my life as a humble blogger. Last week I wrote a story about Neil's surprise new album, LIVING WITH WAR coming out. Please read that so I don't have to repeat anything I've already written and I can just continue from where I left off.

I left off right after having sat in a room in Elliot Roberts' home (Neil's manager) with earphones on listening to a disc Neil had made for him. After years of always hearing Neil's music on discs personally put together by Neil, I appreciated how much better this listening experience was bound to be compared to hearing the songs on a commercial CD. Before-- and again after-- playing it for me Elliot asked me not to write about it until Wednesday. That's today.

First my biases: I'm prone to love everything Neil records. I feel he's one of the greatest songwriters and musicians of our time. If I listen to a song of his and I don't get it, I have long learned that that is because I haven't spent enough time with it and that when I do, I will eventually see what he was trying to do and appreciate it. A second bias, just as strong-- and one regular DWT readers are already very aware of and probably in sync with-- is my abiding mistrust for the Bush Regime and the alarm with which I view what they have done, and continue to do, to the country I love so much. The nexus of these two biases lead to an incredible hour of listening.

The specifics of the songs Neil has recorded and the points he raises lyrically should come as no surprise-- not even to people whose consciousnesses have been enveloped in a powerful and mind-numbing haze for the last few years. Conventional wisdom has pretty much made it clear that Bush and his regime are incompetent, venal and corrupt and that his war is one of the most catastrophic foreign policy blunders every made by a U.S. president. What Neil has done with LIVING WITH WAR is made these idess easily digestible for post-literate western society at large. He's managed to create a body of work that will help make it easy for people to talk about the war, Bush's short-comings and how to deal with them. Virtually no one wants the U.S. to start a (nuclear?) war against Iran-- not the citizens of this country and not the professional military. But who's going to stop Bush and the crazed, obsessed fanatics he's surrounded himself with? LIVING WITH WAR will filter up into political policy circles, not with answers but with the questions he's raised from us and for us.

According to his manager, Neil recently flew back from the Nashville premiere of his film, HEART OF GOLD, with Steve Bing, a film producer friend who is also one of the most consistently generous supporters of progressive causes in the U.S. (Bing, 41 and one of the richest men in America, who at 6'4" likes to wear jeans and T-shirts, has donated mightily to the Democratic Party, to Stanford University and gave $10 million to the National Resources Defense Council's study of global warming, among many other things.) He and Neil had a long talk about Bush's war in Iraq and what the Bush Regime has been doing to the U.S. The discussion helped Neil flesh out an idea that was germinating in his mind, a concept album about Bush's America, something he started getting at when he wrote and performed GREENDALE. From the time he started writing the songs until the album was recorded, 9 days passed. Neil can be fast, but that is really fast.

The first track is called "After the Garden" and, obviously, its first lines are the first lines of the album:
Won't need no shadow man
Runnin' the government
A nice optimistic beginning for a collection of songs that could have been a big downer. Neil chose a different road though-- one that is inspiring and positive, both musically and lyrically.

The second song, the title track, is something I've already covered in the first post and I included all the lyrics there. Neil's use of part of the "Star Spangled Banner" towards the end is chilling and a great reminder that this is our country, not just Bush's and Cheney's and Rumsfeld's and the reactionaries' who are behind the immensely unpopular and tottering, incompetent regime.

The next song starts out dark and ominous, "The Restless Consumer," a song as destined to be called "Don't Need No More Lies," as Green Day's classic "Good Riddance" is always called "Time Of Your Life." This is a heavy song that weaves together several threads which have shown up in Neil's work for many years. Just from my one listen I took from it an anger at the power of "Madison Avenue" to create absurd demands-- from needless consumerism to... needless wars. The song questions how a society-- ours-- sets priorities. Why wars instead of curing diseases, for example? This'll be a good one for college professors to discuss with their students for decades to come.

"Shock And Awe" is the fourth song on the record. Neil doesn't have planes and tanks and bombs. He has words and, ultimately, his "Shock and Awe" will be long remembered after Bush and his shock and awe are nothing but an unfortunate footnote in history books.
Back in the days of shock and awe
We came to liberate them all
History was the cruel judge of overconfidence
Back in the days of shock and awe.
Thousands of children scarred for life
Millions of tears for a soldier's wife
Both sides are losing now...

I remember thinking that right around this point in my listening experience, and especially with the next song, "Families," came the realization that I was listening to a classic Neil album that will go down as one of his greatest. The sixth song, "Flags of Freedom," made me glad I was sitting alone so I could let me tears flow freely without embarrassing myself or anyone else. The first 2 lines give it all away: "Today is the day our younger son/Is going off to war..." The blurb Neil wrote on his website,
""I think it is a metal version of Phil Ochs and Bob Dylan... metal folk protest?" has a lot to do with this song. There's even a shout out to Dylan in the lyrics!

The next song is the one that really lays it on the line, the one all his accumulated moral authority allows him to write, the one everyone wants to know about, "Let's Impeach the President." Maybe his pal Steve Bing should send the lyrics to all the wet-finger-in-the-wind Democratic senators who refuse to back Russ Feingold's moderate censure resolution. Instinctively, Neil must have known the song is going to cause an uproar and become the focus of the album. So he crafted an absolute masterpiece, immune from the barbs and arrows that will surely come.
Let's impeach the president for lying
Misleading our country into war
Abusing all the power that we gave him
And shipping all our money out the door
He then goes on to lay out a case as strong as anything Henry Waxman is going to do-- maybe not as specific-- but a lot more poetic. The song discusses the Regime's criminality, spying, the mess they made of post-Katrina New Orleans, hijacking "our religion" for partisan purposes, as well as how they have used divisiveness and racism to further their political agenda. Neil backs up his lyrics with Bush's own words, turning his inspid/Orwellian words on tape against him as the song is transformed from a hard rocker into a soaring gospel inspirational.

He follows it with a more forward-looking "Lookin' For A Leader," which has the musical potential to be a single. It's a song crying out to "re-unite the red, white and blue," and to "clean up the corruption." Neil sings that "We're lookin' for a leader/With the Great Spirit on his side." He even includes an interesting couple of shout outs to Colin Powell and to Barack Obama, with whom he spent some time at Farm Aid. (I won't give them away; you'll want to hear how he approaches this himself. He even almost mentions the Hillary word... but doesn't-- thank God.) This song is a really good rocker that radio programmers are probably going to gravitate to; it won't get the raving, vicious right wing fanatics calling in and threatening to kill djs.

The album ends with a song about somebody's buddy who went to Iraq, "Roger and Out" and it goes into a stirring rendition of "America the Beautiful" sung by a 100 piece choir. Elliot assured me it was comprised of the best voices in L.A. It sounded that way. And they're singing all over the album. In fact one of them, Alicia Morgan, an articulate and idealistic blogger, as well as a wonderful singer, was interviewed the other day in THE INDEPENDENT, a U.K. newspaper.

I spoke to some of my old comrades at Reprise today. They're still getting their heads around a marketing strategy for the album, although it looks like an early summer release, perhaps with songs streaming on the internet early and probably a single to radio "very soon."


UPDATE: ROLLING STONE SEEMS TO AGREE WITH NEIL

The new issue of ROLLING STONE, the cover of which you see above, is just out with an assessment from one of America's most distinguished and best-regarded historians: Bush will probably rank as the worst president in American history. Hey! DWT has been saying that since... forever. I mean when he stole the 2000 election you should have had a clue-- if you weren't paying attention to the campaign and thought how easy Clinton made it look to be president and thought even a nincompoop like Bush, Jr. could muddle through it without doing much damage.


THURSDAY UPDATE: THE COVER ART

My old friend Dan left Warner Bros soon after I did and moved to Spain. He returned to America, and to Warners, this year and one of his first assignments was to work with the team that will be getting out all the official Neil and LIVING WITH WAR information. I grabbed this picture of the cover art from Dan's new site, which also has a brand new video interview with Neil about the new album (done by a somewhat lame local tv talking head).

HAS BUSH BECOME THE RODNEY DANGERFIELD OF AMERICAN POLITICS?

The new SUSA polls on presidential approval came out today. Oy! Other than brain-washed Mormons-- I mean, really now, should Utah be a state?? with 2 senators and some representatives? and with a part in electing presidents? be real-- the only states where Bush has a greater approval rating than his disapproval rating are Idaho (home of the Aryan Nation), Wyoming (home of Dick Cheney) and Nebraska. It's tied in Oklahoma. Other than that every single state-- including even the entire Confederacy-- pegs Bush's disapproval rating at 50% or worse.

Republicans who are most afraid of reverse coattails have plenty of reason to be afraid, particularly rubber-stamp Republican incumbents in Montana, Arizona, Indiana, North Carolina, Kentucky, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Missouri, Florida. And in some states Bush has gotten so toxic that Republicans associated with him and his disastrous policies could be absolutely swamped. Colorado, for example has a 62% disapproval rating. Ohio's is 63% and Nevada's and Michigan's is each 65%. But how would you like being a loyal Bush rubber-stamper in states like Connecticut (69%), New Jersey (69%), Delaware (70%), Vermont (70%), Massachusetts (70%), New York (72%) or Rhode Island (74%)? If ever there was a chance to get rid of blithely rubber-stamping reactionary goons like Peter King (NY-03; great job of recruitment, Rahm!), Vito Fossella (NY-13), Sue Kelly (NY-19), John Sweeney (NY-20), John Kuhl (NY-29), Frank LoBiondo (NJ-02; shout out to ole Rahm; shame he was so busy waging war on Christine Cegelis to do anything useful), Mike Ferguson (NJ-07), Rob Simmons (CT-02), Chris Shays (CT-04), Nancy Johnson (CT-05) or, in some ways, most important of all, Joe Lieberman (D I-CT), that time is now!


THURSDAY EVENING UPDATE: BUSH APPROVAL RATINGS HEADED TOWARDS ZERO

Librul media giant, Fox News, in an attempt to undermine the Dear Leader, has released a new poll today purporting to show that Bush's approval rating has fallen to 33%. They must hate America because they are claiming that "President Bush’s job approval rating slipped this week and stands at a new low of 33 percent approve, down from 36 percent two weeks ago and 39 percent in mid-March." Meanwhile, Ari Berman might be feelin' a momentary twinge of sympathy for horrified Republican candidates in states that Bush threatens to visit.

WHO WILL TALK FOR BUSH ONCE SCOTTY MCCLELLAN SASHAYS BACK TO AUSTIN? DON'T ASK!

Ever since his wild White House sleep-overs with that gay right wing hooker/"journalist" whose advertised specialty is watersports (i.e.- peeing on his clients) it has been rumored that Scotty McClellan would be stepping down as BushCo's press secretary. His mommy is running for governor of Texas and he feels very at home in the Austin bar scene. Anyway, CNN just reported that the man David Gergen has been referring to as "President Bolten" decided to tell Scotty to pack up his rubber sheets and ride off into the sunset. And, according to CNN, Bolten even found the replacement the Bush Regime most wants: Fox News' least fair and least balanced-- least balanced in many, many ways (though not in Scotty's way)-- Tony Snow. You probably think I'm making this up as a late April Fool's joke. In that case, the joke's on you. I'm not; it's true!


THURSDAY UPDATE: AL FRANKEN, GREEN DAY AND SCOTTY MCCLELLAN

I hope you have the time of your life...
The president has set high standards,
The highest of standards for people in his administration
He's made it very clear to people in his adminsitration
That he expects them to adhere to the highest standards of conduct
If anyone in this administration was involved in it
They would no longer be in this administration.

CONTEST FOR THE BEST PROTEST MUSIC VIDEOS

Justice Through Music announced today that they're launching a new campaign called Harmony Vids to motivate artists, bands, filmmakers and others to create a whole series of new protest videos. Justice Through Music is a non-profit organization dedicated to working with people to support civil rights and in 2004 they became well-known for a gigantic voter registration drive focused around the "Rock Your Rights" campaign, during which they distributed tens of thousands of free DVDs. They have been working with like-minded bands such as Sleater-Kinney, Anti-Flag, Indigo Girls, O.A.R., Violent Femmes, Yellowcard, the Living End, and many otehrs.

Starting today, Justice Through Music is looking for videos that make a cultural statement, have staying power, and will result in a change in consciousness. Their first category is for filmmakers to compete in creating videos for songs posted on the JTM website by the band Op-Crtitical. According to a the organization, "Whoever makes the best video of each song will win at least a $500 prize, and the video will be featured on the JTM front page, submitted to film festivals and cable TV, placed in a Harmony Vids! DVD, included in press releases, and played on many Internet sites, cool blogs and news sites where they will be viewed by millions of people." And their second category is for bands and performers to submit their own music videos-- with the same prize structure awarded in each of 4 genres: "rock," "urban," "country" and "other."

The first video, available on www.op-critical.com, is about a wife who lost her husband in the Iraq war, and it was shot at Arlington National Cemetery.

Protest songs can be about the war, politicians, the environment, fascism, lies, fear, the military and all civil rights related topics. JTM will post all videos submitted as long as they are good quality. Submissions will be accepted until September 15, 2006 and winners will be announced by October 1, 2006. For more information, visit the Justice Through Music website.

TIME TO IMPEACH? CENSURE? INVESTIGATE? SOMETHING? OR DO WE JUST WAIT FOR NOVEMBER?

When I woke up this morning and put on CNN all the mindless chatter was about how the Republicans in Congress were mad at Bush for being such a dismal failure and how the public's increasingly negative perception of him and the job he is doing could lead to staggering losses in the November midterm elections. The solution? The new chief-on-staff, Josh Bolten, who David Gergen kept referring to as "President Bolten" last night (in a dig at Bush's obvious inability to connect-- with anything), will name his own successor as White House Budget Director: Rob Portman. Although an obvious failure at his current position as U.S. Trade Representative, the theory is that Portman is respected and liked from his days as an Ohio congressman and part of the GOP House leadership and for the bang-up job he did helping re-elect Bush in 2004. "Part of the GOP House leadership" means he is a crook connected to his ex-liege lord Tom DeLay and "bang-up job re-electing Bush" means involvement in massive financial and electoral fraud and in the undermining of democracy. Sounds great. I'm sure it will solve all Bush's problems, although CNN's assertions that both sides of the aisle are enamoured of him are somewhat belied by Harry Reid's somewhat unkind reaction to his appointment today. "From record trade deficits to record budget deficits," deadpanned Reid, "Bob Portman should fit right in at George Bush's OMB."

And those problems are mounting. Despite the grotesque and vicious partisan swift-boating all the retired generals who have courageously spoken out against Rumsfeld's incompetent policies in regard to Iraq and the disaster his reign over the Pentagon has been, the public has grown more and more disenchanted with the Bush Regime by the day. Yesterday's VANITY FAIR article by the better half of the Woodward and Bernstein combo that brought down Richard Nixon, won't help.

Essentially, Carl Bernstein is calling for bipartisan hearings to investigate the whole rotten, crumbling edifice of the catastrophic Bush presidency and he's asking if this is the way congressional Republicans can save themselves in November.

In an acknowledged reference to John Dean's prescient book of two years ago, "Worse than Watergate?" are the first 3 words Bernstein uses in his explosive piece. And it gets stronger. "High crimes and misdemeanors justifying the impeachment of George W. Bush, as increasing numbers of Democrats in Washington hope, and, sotto voce, increasing numbers of Republicans— including some of the president's top lieutenants— now fear? Leaders of both parties are acutely aware of the vehemence of anti-Bush sentiment in the country, expressed especially in the increasing number of Americans— nearing fifty percent in some polls— who say they would favor impeachment if the president were proved to have deliberately lied to justify going to war in Iraq... Raising the worse-than-Watergate question and demanding unequivocally that Congress seek to answer it is, in fact, overdue and more than justified by ample evidence stacked up from Baghdad back to New Orleans and, of increasing relevance, inside a special prosecutor's office in downtown Washington."

Bernstein's premise is that it is premature to seriously talk about impeachment-- or even about Russ Feingold's very moderate censure resolution-- until after the Senate vote, "hopefully," he says, "before the November elections, and with overwhelming support from both parties— to undertake a full investigation of the conduct of the presidency of George W. Bush, along the lines of the Senate Watergate Committee's investigation during the presidency of Richard M. Nixon."

He makes the point that the evidence justifying such a bipartisan investigation is overwhelming, and that the public absolutely must learn "what this president and his vice president knew and when they knew it; to determine what the Bush administration has done under the guise of national security; and to find out who did what, whether legal or illegal, unconstitutional or merely under the wire, in ignorance or incompetence or with good reason, while the administration barricaded itself behind the most Draconian secrecy and disingenuous information policies of the modern presidential era."

Bernstein even points at that as big a partisan political hack as Pennsylvania Senator Arlen is howling-- perhaps ominously for Bush, since he is the Republican Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee-- that "We ought to get to the bottom of it so it can be evaluated, again, by the American people. [T]he President of the United States owes a specific explanation to the American people … about exactly what he did."

Bernstein's article is, in essence, demanding-- with subpoena power-- a "trustworthy official record of what has occurred... how decisions were reached, and even what the actual policies promulgated and approved by the president are," in regard to everything from the leaks in the Plame case, torture at Abu Ghraib and Guantánamo, wholesale N.S.A. domestic wiretapping in contravention of specific prohibitive law, the decisions to attack Iraq to "some of the more questionable policies and conduct of this presidency, even those that turned a natural disaster in New Orleans into a catastrophe of incompetence and neglect." He seems more than a little pissed off at what he terms "the routine disregard for truthfulness in the dissemination of information to the American people and Congress."

Yes, quite a bit more than a little pissed off. "The first fundamental question that needs to be answered by and about the president, the vice president, and their political and national-security aides, from Donald Rumsfeld to Condoleezza Rice, to Karl Rove, to Michael Chertoff, to Colin Powell, to George Tenet, to Paul Wolfowitz, to Andrew Card (and a dozen others), is whether lying, disinformation, misinformation, and manipulation of information have been a basic matter of policy—used to overwhelm dissent; to hide troublesome truths and inconvenient data from the press, public, and Congress; and to defend the president and his actions when he and they have gone awry or utterly failed."

Perhaps not taking into account the intense partisanship that the extreme right has used first to take over the Republican Party and then to sharply divide the nation, Bernstein speculates that "as with Watergate, the investigation of George W. Bush and his presidency needs to start from a shared premise and set of principles that can be embraced by Democrats and Republicans, by liberals and centrists and conservatives, and by opponents of the war and its advocates: that the president of the United States and members of his administration must defend the requirements of the Constitution, obey the law, demonstrate common sense, and tell the truth." The Republican rubber-stamp Congress shares nothing with the Democrats or with the American people as strongly as the guilt they share with the Bush Regime for virtually all of their faults and failures. This is going to be a big problem in Bernstein's hopes to get this bipartisan investigation going before November.

In November the American people will either decide that they indeed do not want an attack on Iran-- unless, of course Bush has already, as is likely, done it-- or they will attempt to evade responsibility for what it brings. In November, the American people will decide whether they want the madness brought to a stop or if they want more years-- perhaps endless years-- or a rubber-stamp congress aiding and abetting policies that have shown themselves as utterly abhorrent to a growing majority of people in this country.

As Bernstein points out, "in a baker's dozen of hearings before pliant [he politely describes as "pliant" what I call "rubber-stamp'] committees of Congress, a parade of the top brass from Rice to Rumsfeld, to the Joint Chiefs, to Paul Bremer has managed for almost three years to evade responsibility for— or even acknowledgment of— the disintegrating situation on the ground in Iraq, its costs in lives and treasure, and its disastrous reverberations through the world, and for an assault on constitutional principles at home. Similarly, until the Senate Watergate hearings, Nixon and his men at the top had evaded responsibility for Watergate and their cover-up of all the 'White House horrors.' With the benefit of hindsight, it is now almost impossible to look at the president's handling of the war in Iraq in isolation from his handling of Hurricane Katrina and its aftermath. Certainly any investigation of the president and his administration should include both disasters. Before 9/11, Bush and Condoleezza Rice had been warned in the starkest of terms— by their own aides, by the outgoing Clinton administration, and by experts on terrorism— of the urgent danger of a spectacular al-Qaeda attack in the United States. Yet the first top-level National Security Council meeting to discuss the subject was not held until September 4, 2001— just as the F.B.I. hierarchy had been warned by field agents that there were suspected Islamic radicals learning to fly 747s with no legitimate reasons for doing so, but the bureau ultimately ignored the urgency of problem, just as Bush had ample opportunity (despite what he said later) to review and competently execute a disaster plan for the hurricane heading toward New Orleans."

In what sounds like a very convincing case he is building towards a call to prematurely end the Bush era, Bernstein points out the 4 eternal and indelible "photographic images of the George W. Bush epoch: an airplane crashing into World Trade Tower number two; Bush in a Florida classroom reading from a book about a goat while a group of second-graders continued to captivate him for another seven minutes after Andrew Card had whispered to the president, "America is under attack"; floodwaters inundating New Orleans, and its residents clinging to rooftops for their lives; and, two days after the hurricane struck, Bush peeking out the window of Air Force One to inspect the devastation from a safe altitude. The aftermath of the hurricane's direct hit, both in terms of the devastation and the astonishing neglect and incompetence from the top down, would appear to be unique in American history. Except for the Civil War and the War of 1812 (when the British burned Washington), no president has ever lost an American city; and if New Orleans is not lost, it will only be because of the heroics of its people and their almost superhuman efforts to overcome the initial lethargy and apparent non-comprehension of the president. Bush's almost blank reaction was foretold vividly in a video of him and his aides meeting on August 28, 2005, the day before Katrina made landfall. The tape— withheld by the administration from Congress but obtained by the Associated Press along with seven days of transcripts of administration briefings— shows Bush and his Homeland Security chief being warned explicitly that the storm could cause levees to overflow, put large number of lives at risk, and overwhelm rescuers."

Is this tape, and these pictures enough for Congress to overcome it's partisanship and go forward with an investigation now. Woodward says yes. I think he's smoking something laced with something else. If gallows are in Bush's future those same gallows will see scores of congressmen as well; they're all in it together and this is something the American people need to rescue themselves from. Let's just pray Diebold isn't counting the votes.

No secretary of defense could have done a more catastrophically destructive job than Rummy, but that doesn't mean that he's "the" problem

Much as I'm enjoying the spectacle of "Dainty Donny" Rumsfeld taking some heat for his catastrophic tenure as secretary of defense (and "catastrophic" is the kindest description I can think of for his reign at the Pentagon), I've also been uneasy about the implicit suggestion that he is "the problem." Thank goodness our First Chimp isn't the firing sort, at least when firing would hint at his own malevolence and incompetence, because there seems to be a mood in the air that if only Rummy was shitcanned, everything would be peaches.

E. J. Dionne Jr. seems to me to have gotten the point exactly right, and staked out an interesting position regarding the revolt of the generals, in his WashPost column today.

"For all his mistakes," Dionne writes, "Rumsfeld is not some alien creature operating as a loner sabotaging the otherwise reasonable policies of his bosses." And he has smart things to say on behalf of the generals under attack by the predictably hypocritical wingnut noise machine. The piece is well worth a read.

WANTED: THE PHOTO OF DUKE CUNNINGHAM, TOMMY KONTOGIANNIS AND GEORGE W. BUSH, 3 CRIMINALS WORKING ON A PRESIDENTIAL PARDON SCHEME

I don't know if the San Diego Union-Tribune has turned into one of the best investigative newspapers in America or if they just happen to have the most crooked officials in their area to write about (between Duncan Hunter, Jerry Lewis, Brian Bilbray, Howard Kaloogian, Dana Rohrbacher and, of course, former area resident Randy "Duke" Cunningham). But whatever the reason, anyone who wants to follow the intricacies and machinations of the Republican Culture of Corruption in Washington DC is better off reading the San Diego Union-Tribune than even the New York Times or Washington Post!

Today Joey Cantupe has penned a much-needed follow-up on a side road of the Cunningham scandals few reporters have ventured down: sleazy New York Republican mystery man and big time briber Thomas "Gus" Kontogiannis. I started looking into Kontogiannis last summer when it started to look like Cunningham was getting caught for all the millions and millions of bribes he was taking as part of the criminal conspiracy that was Jerry Lewis' Defense Appropriations Committee.

You'll find my Kontogiannis research-- with some huffing and puffing-- on the link I've attached to his name above. The Union-Tribune has some of that background too. They make a good point that I missed, namely that Cunningham was like a kept-woman for Kontogiannis-- as they call it "a congressman on retainer." He was hoping that-- and bankrolling-- Cunningham's future, not as a prison inmate but as the next Donald Rumsfeld. An FBI agent working on the case put it like this: "Let's look at it this way. Duke Cunningham had power and no money, and Tommy Kontogiannis had money [$70 million range, not Cheney or Bush kind of wealth] but no power." (And on this not too complicated concept, Tom DeLay and Rick Santorum were able to subvert the American democratic system into the Republican Culture of Corruption that has come to rule in DC-- and that has already sent Cunningham to prison and will soon send dozens of Republican elected officials to the same fate.) Oh, and Kontogiannis is also a two-time convicted criminal, both times for bribery, and must have a pardon in order to avail himself of lucrative business opportunities with Uncle Sam.

In 2000, Kontogiannis was arrested for receiving more than $2 million in kickbacks in a bid-rigging scheme involving junk computer foisted on the Queens School District. The district Superintendent, Celestine Miller, a Republican scam artist, with absurd pretensions to get elected to Congress helped Kontogiannis defraud the district. He financed her doomed campaign, in part by giving her a brown paper bag filled with $50,000 in cash. That Cunningham sold him a presidential pardon for $400,000 is the most covered-up part of the Randy "Duke" Cunningham scandals. That's because there's only one person who can grant presidential pardons and it isn't Randy "Duke" Cunningham (nor is it Vice President Cheney, nor Irving Libby, nor Michael Brown, nor Gale Norton, nor Tom DeLay nor any of the myriad corrupt scoundrels Bush has surrounded himself with. Only Bush can grant a presidential pardon. What was his cut of the $400,000 bribe from Kontogiannis?

My favorite paragraph in the Union-Tribune story is: "The two men also visited the White House together. Kontogiannis had his picture taken with Cunningham at a White House reception, and friends of Kontogiannis say the businessman kept a photo of himself with Cunningham and President Bush in his house." I bet federal prosecutors would love to have it!

But there's more-- Kontogiannis and a shady Saudi operative living in Southern California, Ziyad Abduljawad, took Cunningham and another crooked Republican California congressloon, Ken Calvert, to Saudi Arabia. Calvert and Cunningham were not there for sightseeing-- nor on government business, at least not legitimate government business.

Kontogiannis is the very worst kind of human detritus, a wealthy crook who has stolen and cheated his way to the top of the financial heap, an utter scumbag treating everyone "below" him with haughty contempt. He has dozens of law suits pending against him, mostly for cheating everyone he's done any kind of business with. That he found the GOP and low-life whores and rogues like Duke Cunningham, Peter King, Ken Calvert and George W. Bush is completely fitting. Hopefully they'll all share a prison cell someday.

CHARLIE BASS, CORRUPT REPUBLICAN RUBBER-STAMP, VOTED TO SCREW UP THE INTERNET. TIME TO REALLY GET BEHIND PAUL HODES IN NH-02

Matt over at MyDD has an important diary called "Ten Days Ago, These Six Democrats Took a Sledgehammer to the Internet". I recommend everyone read it but I want to summarize it in one sentence: 6 Democrats joined 17 Republicans to vote down net neutrality protection and pave the way for the big telecommunications corporations to completely fuck with the way the internet is delivered. Matt is suggesting we hold the 6 Democrats' feet to the fire by supporting primary challenges against them (presumably in 2008). OK, I'm in-- especially for the ones who have consistently supported corporate interests over consumer interests like Ed Towns (NY-10), Al Wynn (MD-04) Bart Stupak (MI-01), and Charlie Gonzales (TX-20). Of course 2008 is a long time from now and many issues and distractions are sure to come up between now and then.

Is there anything we can do now? Most of the Republicans are in relatively safe districts or have weak, ineffective opposition. A couple of races jump out as possibilities for concerted netroots action, particularly what is shaping up to be a close contest in NH-02, where Paul Hodes is offering up a strong challenge to Republican rubber-stamper Charles Bass. Hodes seems progressive and independent and probably not a DCCC stooge, a big plus (at least for me). And Bass is most definitely tainted by his relationships with some of the worst instigators of the Republican Culture of Corruption, having taken many thousands of dollars from unsavory characters like Tom DeLay, Randy "Duke" Cunningham, Bob Ney, Roy Blunt, and John Boehner.

New Hampshire's second congressional district is a moderate district with a modest Democratic PVI (which combines the last two presidential election results and compares them to the national average) of +2.7. In other words, it's a district that voted against Bush but elected a Republican. Bass has been a rubber-stamp shill for all of the Bush Regime's catastrophic agenda for our nation. It isn't the agenda of western and northern New Hampshire. Bass is a miserable congressman, undeserving of another term. His predictable vote against net neutrality should give impetus for the netroots community to get behind Hodes in a real way.


MONDAY EVENING UPDATE: HODES KICKIN' BUTT ALREADY

David over at Swing State Project has some great fnancial news on Hodes' campaign today.

A DISPATCH FROM SHEEHANISTAN, TEXAS-- ONSTAGE AND BACKSTAGE, A GUEST BLOG FROM TOM CHELSTON IN CRAWFORD

A few weeks ago I introduced DWT readers to singer-songwriter (and veteran) Tom Chelston and his music here and again here. You may remember that last summer I traveled to the Bush stage set (former pig farm) in Crawford to join Cindy Sheehan's protest against Bush's disastrous occupation of Iraq. Last week I was unable to go back but Tom did go and was kind enough to report back for us.



I made the trek to Crawford to perform "BushWhacked” for the Saturday Camp Casey rally. I flashed back to the images of Cindy’s organized dissent reaching through my big screen to the air-conditioned comfort of my living room last summer. Months later I was invited to the “thanksgiving” protest at CCII, but I opted for turkey and football. This time I had to go. I had to get off my ass and drive the 212 miles. I had nearly 2400 other reasons. It was time to learn firsthand about Cindy Sheehan. I had to see her on the stage, working the crowd and I had to examine her demeanor behind the curtains. I had to take my own “sincerity biopsy." In less than one year, the bushies and their MSM had propelled Cindy from grieving mom to national menace. I had to learn the truth about Cindy Sheehan. I hate this bullshit Iraq war and the evil bastards that perpetrated it but do I join Cindy’s cause already in progress or do I start my own?

I loaded my guitar and a bedroll in my BMW (not all budding activists drive a flowery VW bus) and I left Houston at dark thirty. The Bluebonnets were blooming from Conroe to Waco. “Cows and Bluebonnets under the big Texas sky”. It sounds like an idyllic country western lyric! (yes, there used to be a few of those).

Soon I spotted a sign “Crawford 8 miles” and reality immediately crept back in with every passing whip stick. As I approached the enormous “Welcome to Crawford” sign with the obligatory re-touched picture of the first couple, four Texas Highway Patrol cruisers whisked by me at an abnormally high rate of speed. Even though Bush had taken an Easter pass from Crawford (a “first” since he loaded up the truck and went to D.C.), it was very clear that Crawford didn’t. I wheeled through the gravel/grass lot at Crawford Peace House and more cars streamed in behind me, a few at first, but by the time I shut my beamer down, the lot was nearing capacity.

Almost immediately, the vibe was palpable at CPH. Just like the variety of motorcycles, economy cars, gas sucking trucks and flowered “hippie buses” converging here, the growing throng is equally diverse. I met soldiers, professors, schoolteachers, nurses, retirees, teenagers, house pets and even a few hippies. A remarkable cross-section of America has turned up in Crawford.

As we shuttled from CPH to CCII, we passed the handful of “counter-protesters” setting up their tent and their “peace through strength” signage. An occasional shout of “go home” greeted us as we navigated the Crawford back-roads to CCII. Our shuttle driver (adorned in blue bunny ears) provided a detailed history of CPH and pointed out the triangular patch of land that became Cindy’s first “stand”, Camp Casey I, last summer. Nobody aboard our shuttle could definitively I.D. the location of Bush’s ranch as we threaded through the pasture, but we passed a newly constructed Secret Service “compound” that was quite conspicuous with its government issued vehicles, antenna towers and fine trimmed lawn. (Our taxes built quite a spread.)

We reached CCII and joined three or four hundred other clear-headed Americans and the program was already underway. The morning was filled with speeches, stories and sad reminders of why we were gathered. I was sitting near the back of the “tent” tuning my Taylor and thinking about my performance when I spotted Cindy sitting alone at a nearby table. My moment had arrived. She was typing away on her laptop as I handed her my CD and introduced myself. Cindy was cordial yet guarded as I explained that one of the verses of one of my songs was inspired by her noble stand against king george and his jesters. I can only imagine the number of supporters, “hangers on” and antagonists she has encountered during the past year and I didn’t expect more from her. Our discussion was brief but I had accomplished the first part of my mission. I had looked her in the eyes to see for myself. The grief and the pain remain in Cindy’s eyes. Take away the cameras and the rhetoric and you’ve got an angry, sad mother. Few things are more dangerous!

Soon it was “show time” and I headed for the stage. As CCII resident soundman/official singer/songwriter Jesse Dyen adjusted my stage monitors, I threw out a plug for Neil Young’s new, soon to be released album and mentioned the track “Let’s Impeach The President” which drew moderate applause. It was Mr. Young that had originally inspired me to write songs that mattered and as a hat tip, I brought along my “harp” for the gig. In my haste, I neglected to weigh the consequences of not actually knowing how to play a harmonica but overall, the songs came off decently. This was a sober, somber crowd and my message (albeit preaching to the choir) was well received. As I walked off the stage, I was honored to meet the rest of the founding members of Camp Casey. I met the fathers and mothers that I was singing for and about. The emotional connection is simply indescribable.

As the program rolled on, I listened to the Gold Star Families and an intense speech by IVAW, but the highlight for me was a speech by the MIGHTY Reverend Joseph Lowery (the famous “agitator” at Coretta Scott King’s funeral). His message was powerful and emotional and at 84, he seems to be actually gaining speed and momentum.

Throughout the day, I watched Cindy move about the camp and it was very clear to me that “she is who she is”. Take away the bullshit media spin and white house propaganda. Beyond an angry grieving mother, Cindy Sheehan is first and foremost an American Patriot. As Reverend Lowery alluded, Cindy Sheehan is a modern day Rosa Parks. Her call to arms from a ditch in Crawford is already legendary and the movement is growing exponentially.

Cindy’s daughter Carly was on hand this year (her first visit) and she read a poem she had written after Casey was murdered. As Cindy embraced Carly, she explained that the poem was “what got her off her ass to take action”. I thought about that comment and how it was really Cindy’s actions that got me off my ass. Part two of my mission was accomplished. The biopsy results were conclusive. Cindy is 100%, the real deal, authentic. Her battle cry got me off my ass. This bullshit war must stop and our soldiers should be pulled away from the civil war NOW. Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and the rest of the evil-doers should be removed from office and tried for war crimes at minimum.

If you don’t have any skin in the game, pretend you do. Pretend it’s your kid or your parent and get off your ass! Just since I started writing this dispatch, two more American Soldiers died. Who will join us?

WHO ARE THE NEXT 7 REPUBLICAN LAWMAKERS HEADED FOR PRISON? TOM COBURN THINKS HE KNOWS.

Before we get into this story, it's important to know that Tom Coburn is widely considered-- on both sides of the aisle-- the absolutely craziest and most extremist nit in the entire U.S. Senate. He is startk-raving mad and so right-wing that he's off the measurable scale. You know how I tend to write a lot about "rubber-stamp Republicans?" Coburn isn't one of them; he's a Republican that needs to be safely put away in a room with rubber walls. A medical doctor, Coburn has the absolute worst record of any of the GOP nutcases in the Senate on health care issues. Pick any topic related to health care and he always rates an absolute zero-- issues related to aid to the chronically ill: zero; access to affordable drugs: zero; Medicare and Medicaid funding: zero; issues involving medical care for veterans and active military personnel and their families: zero; anything to do with stem cell research or family planning or women's choice: zero. Not that he's better on any issues-- labor rights, human rights, impartial justice, civil rights, education, housing... all zeros. You would be hard-pressed to find a worst U.S. Senator on the issues. (Maybe Brownback is as bad.)

That said, Coburn is also someone who runs his mouth uncontrollably; part of his general insanity. And Friday predicted to an Oklahoma newspaper, The Tulsa World, that at least six congressmen + a fellow senator (he was referring to Montana's most crooked politician Conrad Burns, not he didn't name him) would wind up in prison for involvement with Jack Abramoff and the Republican Culture of Corruption that pervades Washington, D.C.

When reporters in Wagoner, Oklahoma questioned him as to who the 7 solons are that will be heading off to join Randy "Duke" Cunningham in the federal prison system, Coburn said "if you've been keeping up with things, you've got a pretty good idea" but steadfastly refused to name names.

Here at DWT we very much have been paying attention to the investigations around the Abramoff/DeLay scandals (as well as around the Republican bribe scandals involving defense contractors) and, we are at a loss to come up with only 6 congressmen headed for prison. (Everyone agrees that Burns is the senator most likely to be indicted, found guilty and incarcerated, so let's leave the Senate out of this.) Obviously Bob Ney (R-OH), Tom DeLay (R-TX) and John Doolittle (R-CA) are on everyone's list of most-likely-to-serve-time, since they've already been named in several indictments. To come up with only 3 more is a bit of a problem since there are at least a dozen more who are egregiously guilty of serious criminality. But if you stick only to the Abramoff-related scandals-- so leaving off the defense contractor stuff that has already nabbed Cunningham and will soon see Jerry Lewis (R-CA), Virgil Goode, Jr (R-VA), Katherine Harris (R-FL), Duncan Hunter (R-CA) and several others indicted-- the most likely would have to be Don Young (R-AK), Richard Pombo (R-CA) and either J.D. Hayworth (R-AZ) or Roy Blunt (R-MO), although it is difficult to imagine Tom Feeney (R-FL), Ernest Istook (R-OK), Pete Sessions (R-TX) or Eric Cantor (R-VA) getting off scott free either.

Coburn also-- appropriately-- lashed out at the corrupt Senate leadership of both pathetic parties for not crafting serious reform legislation.

A KEY TO REPUBLICAN ETHICS PROBLEMS IN THE HOUSE: DOC HASTINGS, YAKIMA'S CROOKED CONGRESSMAN

The GOP has been in power in the House for a very long time. In 1994 the country was sick of the arrogance and almost blasé corruption of the then long-entrenched Democratic Party. A new invigorated House Republican caucus led by firebrand Newt Gingrich put one over on the voters with a solemn promise that they would change things. Well, actually they did change things. But not what they promised to change. They said they would stop corruption. Instead they substituted Republican corruption, even more venal in scope and magnitude, for Democratic corruption. (Now my fear is that instead of real progressive reformers like Francine Busby, Coleen Rowley, Jerry McNerney, Ned Lamont, Rick Penberthy, Jan Schneider, honest and idealistic men and women who seriously want to fix the problem, the Democrats will wind up in Congress with sleazy, slimy pols like Rahm Emanuel and Steny Hoyer and Chuck Schumer in control, realpolitik hacks who have long since discarded any sense of integrity or idealism in the quest for power-- just like Gingrich and DeLay.) I guess we'll have to deal with that after November. At least, I hope so (in a perverse way).

Now, we need to keep our eye on the ball that is still in the air: the Republican Culture of Corruption, systematically put in place by the worst of the worst, the worst lowlifes to ever stalk the halls of Congress (and K Street): Tom DeLay, Jack Abramoff, Rick Santorum, Roy Blunt, John Boehner, Jerry Lewis, Bill Frist, Randy "Duke" Cunningham, Conrad Burns, Richard Pombo, John Doolittle, Deborah Pryce, Bob Ney and, in some ways, worst of all... Doc Hastings.

Who? Doc Hastings is the Republican Representative from Pasco, near Yakima, Washington and he was personally installed by his friend and ally, then House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, to derail the House ethics committee and keep it from investigating the culture of corruption being fostered by DeLay and his crime network. When the actual Ethics chairman, Joel Hefley of Colorado allowed an investigation of DeLay to go forward (and eventually slightly chasten DeLay, the Little Bug Man, Capo di Tutti Capi of the Republican crime wave, fired Hefley, ruined his career, assigned his most corrupted lieutenant, Bob Ney to teach the GOP version of ethics to freshmen congressmen, and installed the corrupt, slavish hack Hastings as head of the historically bipartisan committee. Hastings did a great job-- for DeLay.

Today's Seattle Times does an unflattering profile on Hastings called "Ethics Panel Stalled; What's Up Doc?" The Times starts off by explaining how Hastings was able to avoid pressure to investigate blatant criminals like Cunningham, Ney, and, of course, DeLay, all men either now in or soon headed for lives behind bars.

"Since 2005, newspaper editorials have denounced Hastings & Co. for 'nap time' on the 'do-nothing' 'feckless' and 'inert' ethics committee, accusing it of 'flatlining' and 'ossifying.' Unmoved, Hastings hasn't responded to the criticism. But he is papering the press about such issues as asparagus growers, the apple industry and Northwest wineries... Even GOP members have questioned the ethics committee's credibility recently. A frustrated Republican proposed a congressional inspector general to look into ethics issues, saying the committee is paralyzed."

Hastings has been coming under increasing pressure to explain why he has derailed not just the Ethics Committee in Congress but actually conspired to rid the U.S. Congress of ethics itself! And then there's the little matter of Hastings' involvement with Abramoff's slave labor colony in the Marianas Islands. Hastings refuses to answer any questions... about anything... except asparagus farming and wineries. In his 11 dreadful years in Congress he has held exactly one press conference in Washington, DC. The guy is so lame and clueless that his official campaign website is crawling with pictures of Dick Cheney, a man so reviled by Americans that he is less admired than OJ Simpson and Michael Jackson and barely beats out Paris Hilton on the popularity spectrum. Maybe he thinks no one notices.

Although Hastings resides in the very heart of the Culture of Corruption, his remote district is so red and so out-of-touch, that almost no one considers him to be vulnerable unless a mega-tsunami of revulsion with the Republican rubber-stamp Congress sweeps virtually the whole pack of them out of power in November. The Democrat who is challenging him in WA-04 is Richard Wright, the kind of good-government type who would give a corrupt sleazebag like Hastings nightmares if he represented a less partisan district.

IMPEACHMENT POLL AT MSNBC-- BAD NEWS FOR THE LEAKER-IN-CHIEF

MSNBC is currently conducting a poll-- by all means click on over and join the quarter million who have already voted-- to see how people feel about impeaching the worst occupant in the history of the White House. Would it surprise you if I told you 1.8% don't know or have no opinion? Would it surprise you if I told you that a full 7.5% think Bush has done absolutely nothing wrong and that all the charges against him are just "political?" Would it surprise you if I told you that 4.4% think he may have made a few little mistakes, like all presidents, but that his errors don't approach being high crimes and misdemeanors? Now, I'm sure it won't surprise you to know that the vast majority think Bush should be impeached. Yep, 86% of respondents agree that "between secret spying, the deceptions leading to war and more, there is plenty to justify putting him on trial."

Would this be an inopportune moment to ask you to consider supporting Russ Feingold and his moderate censure resolution by dropping a few bucks into Russ' Progressive Patriots' Fund?

FEAR OF FLYING? ANOTHER BUSH CRONY PREPARES THE GROUND FOR DISASTER-- THIS TIME AT THE FAA

Airplanes and Bush just never were a good mix. First he was a disaster as a disgruntled, mostly AWOL semi-member of the Texas Air National Guard. Even worse-- for America-- Bush's pig-headedness about paying attention to President Clinton and his outgoing administration's dire warnings regarding the dangers posed by Al Qaeda were contributory to the catastrophe of 9-11. And now Bush is setting up an airline catastrophe that could be even worse! Even Bush's rubber-stamp congress can nip this one in the bud.

Right in line with the Bush Regime's seething hatred for working men and women exercising their rights to collective bargaining, as of last week, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has broken off contract talks with the National Air Traffic Controllers Association (NATCA) that would have saved taxpayers, $1.4 BILLION over the next five years.

Air traffic controllers (ATCs), for those who don’t follow aviation, are the folks who guide planes the second they leave the gate to your destination.  Their job is one of the most stressful in the world yet they remain dedicated and hardworking public servants. They’ve been negotiating with the FAA since September 2005.  According to FAA Administrator and Bush-appointed crony Marion Blakey, the FAA wants a “fair” contract that would save taxpayers money.  What part of $1.4 billion in savings Ms Blakey and Bush don't get no one quite understands.

If that’s not bad enough, here’s something else I didn’t realize. So the FAA broke off contract talks and submitted a contract to Congress. If Congress doesn’t act within 60 calendar days-- and we know how lazy and unwilling to put in an honest week's work these people have been for the last 5 years-- the FAA gets to impose their contract on NATCA-- take it or leave it.

So in other words, these dedicated controllers are forced to take whatever the FAA gives them (and, from what I'm hearing from my sources, it's a steaming pile of crap). To make matters worse, the FAA’s version actually penalizes veteran controllers for staying-– creating a situation where it makes more financial sense for eligible controllers to retire than to stay in their vital jobs. By end of 2007, 1 in 4 controllers-– over 4,000-- could retire – and the problem would increase for the next five years by which time over 40% of current controllers will actually be penalized for staying in their jobs.  

BTW, it takes 3-5 years to train an air traffic controller. Unlike most jobs where you can fill the spot immediately with someone new, ATCs take months (and sometimes a year) to learn new positions.  The aviation system is already experiencing a staffing crisis which you can read more about here. Although it may not have dawned on this particular incompetent Bush crony with a fancy job, penalizing veteran controllers if they come to work certainly won’t help the situation. 

I hope this is all getting you as pissed off as I am. That's because, like I said, this could be nipped in the bud. If you go to this site it'll help you contact your congresscritters and tell them to get off their duffs s-- BEFORE this turns into another Bush disaster.

Remember, these are the professionals who landed almost 4,500 airplanes within a matter of minutes on September 11th. And they're the same people who lost their homes and belongings during Hurricane Katrina, Rita, and Wilma but stayed at work to make sure others were lifted to safety – they are heroes. Don’t we owe it to them? Or is it just Bush playing President on Air Force One that deserves a safe flying experience? John Carr, NATCA's president has a cool blog you might want to check out-- entertaining and informative.

IT LOOKED LIKE TOMMY FRANKS MIGHT DEMAND RUMMY RESIGN TODAY BUT HE DIDN'T HAVE THE GUTS. I BET BASIL DALACK WOULD!

And I bet you never heard of Basil Dalack-- unless you live in Tequesta, Florida. The 76 year old lawyer won a seat on the Village Council there recently. Mr. Balack looks like an unlikely hero, but he's as brave and courageous as the generals who have forced the pitiful corporate media to start talking about Rumsfeld's-- and therefor Bush's-- gross incompetence this week. And, like them, he's a beacon of light all citizens, another proud American citizen who is refusing to go along with the destruction of our country-- a veritable V FOR VENDETTA soul right in Tequesta.

Mr. Balack, a Korean War vet, has refused to take the oath of office because it requires him to "support, protect and defend" the federal government. And to Mr. Balack, that's the equivalent of "blind support" of the war and of Bush Regime. If he took the oath, he says, he'd have "the blood of all those Iraqi and American kids on my hands." So he's refused-- though it's put his position in jeopardy-- and he filed a federal lawsuit today, claiming that the oath violates the Constitution by placing a "prior restraint" on his right to free speech and denying him, without due process, the right to take the office to which he was legitimately elected.

Telling the local press that "I have to do the right as I see the right," he says he will continue to speak out against the war and to criticize the Bush Regime-- even if that means he will never be allowed to take his seat on the Council.

SOMETIMES A PICTURE IS WORTH A MILLION WORDS! BROKEBACK FOOTBALL, ANYONE?

I know it was difficult to find a theater showing Academy Award winning movie Brokeback Mountain in a lot of Buy Bull Belt states. It's a shame because it was a really good movie-- and it might help a lot of Buy Bullites to get a better grasp on real life, 21st Century Christian love if they saw it. Meanwhile, though, the photo above was actually on the screens of god-knows-how-many Arkansas television sets a few days ago. The commentators just paused, mouths agape... And nothing came out. Pictured left to right are Arkansas Razorback players Clarke Moore, Brett Goode and Casey Dick. You think they planned this?

NEW NEIL YOUNG ALBUM-- LIFE IN WAR-- WON'T PROVIDE ANY CAMPAIGN DITTIES FOR BUSH AND THE RUBBER-STAMP REPUBLICANS

I smoked my way through college-- I mean like every single day-- and then I went for a two year drive across Asia and a few months smoking black Mazar-i-Sharif hash in Afghanistan-- the psychedelic stuff that never gets exported-- and... presto... I was cured. All interest in drugs were gone. Forever. It was great while it lasted but it was gone. Years later I washed up on the shores of corporate America and somehow wound up as president of Reprise Records-- Neil Young's label. Every time Neil delivered a new album-- or if I'd go up to his ranch to listen to a work in progress-- I'd take a toke, just one (and one was all I needed), from whatever he was smoking. I'd be high all day.

I'm retired now and Neil won't be delivering his new album to me and I won't be taking any tokes off anyone's joints. But I was thrilled this morning when a small company I work with, JamBase, reported that Neil has a new record, and, apparently, he's as sick of the corrupt, lying Bush Regime as the rest of us are!

Neil made it pretty clear with GREENDALE, a truly incredible but underrated album, that he isn't happy with the direction George Bush has taken the country. He told David Fricke of ROLLING STONE "This is a time, I believe, of great inner turmoil for the majority of the American people. There is a new morality coming out of this administration -- fundamentalist religious views; a holier-than-thou attitude towards the rest of the world -- that is not classically American. I don't think Americans felt holier-than-thou in the twentieth century. We were happy and successful, with a great lifestyle. But something else is going on now. That's what Greendale is about. That's what Grandpa's problem is. He can't understand what's going on. He sees all of these things that the Patriot Act has taken away from what he feels is America."

Just after debuting his new film at SxSW Neil shocked the music world by announcing, kind of off-the-cuff, that he had recorded a brand new album and that it's all ready to go. (The guy introducing him, SxSW director Roland Swenson, had referred to how important Neil's song "Ohio," about the National Guard shooting down college students at Kent State, was to another generation then gearing up to end an earlier unpopular war, and how we needed something like that now. Neil took it seriously.) The new album is called LIVING WITH WAR.

One of Neil's collaborators, filmmaker, Jonathan Demme, describes it as "a brilliant electric assault on Bush and the war in Iraq.” The linchpin track, "Impeach the President," features an edited-together Bush rap set to a 100-voice chorus chanting "flip/flop." The album, with Young on Old Black, Rick Rosas on bass and Chad Cromwell on drums, took three days to finish. Yep; that's Neil. No release date is set yet but... hopefully it'll be before November.


10:30AM UPDATE: HOPEFULLY I WON'T HAVE TO SMOKE UP BUT...

I just got off the phone with Neil's manager and he offered to play me the album. So I'm gonna saddle up and ride WAY out to the middle of nowhere and listen. And then I'll report back. Stay tuned.


3 PM UPDATE: Grrrrrr...

Ok; first: the album is beyond belief. I mean it's so great I was jumping out of my skin. That's the good news. The less good news is that they wouldn't play it for me unless I agreed not to write about it for "a few days." (Not even the label has heard it yet and they felt it would be impolite for me to go blabbing the whole story all over the world until after they get to play it for Reprise and the NY Times.) So what can I tell you before "a few days?" Not much. From the time Neil started writing the songs until he finished recording the whole incredible project: 9 days.

Every song is about... you know what (and who). Musically it is so powerful and emotionally it's even more powerful that that!! Many tears while I sat alone with the headset on. Since I already mentioned "Let's Impeach the President," I'll just say a few things about that. It's this great rocker that ends as a gospel song and reads like an indictment. I mean Neil sounds like he's been reading Daily KOS or FireLakeDog! Someone's gotta get this to Henry Waxman! Neil even lays out some evidence in the form of Bush running his mouth on tape.

Will this go down as Neil's greatest album ever? It will be a contender musically. And the impact lyrically could be profound. I'll talk more about that when my period of musical purdah is up next week. If you're walking down the street and someone comes up to you and offers you the opportunity to hear just one song, ask him to play "Flags of Freedom." (Have kleenex handy.)


SATURDAY MORNING UPDATE: NEIL RELEASES LYRICS FROM THE TITLE TRACK

Neil has a streaming message up on his own website talking about the new album. "I think it is a metal version of Phil Ochs and Bob Dylan... metal folk protest? It's called LIVING WITH WAR." And he promises to release the lyrics on the ticker of the website. Today he has the lyrics to the title track up-- the second song on the record and one of the ones I instantly loved:

I'm living with war everyday
I'm living with war in my heart everyday
I'm living with war right now

And when the dawn breaks I see my fellow man
And on the flat-screen we kill and we're killed again
And when the night falls, I pray for peace
Try to remember peace (visualize)

I join the multitudes
I raise my hand in peace
I never bow to the laws of the thought police
I take a holy vow
To never kill again
To never kill again

I'm living with war in my heart
I'm living with war in my heart and my mind
I'm living with war right now

Don't take no tidal wave
Don't take no mass grave
Don't take no smokin' gun
To show how the west was won
But when the curtain falls, I pray for peace
Try to remember peace (visualize)

In the crowded streets
In the big hotels
In the mosques and the doors of the old museum
I take a holy vow
To never kill again
Try to remember peace

The rocket's red glare
Bombs bursting in air
Give proof through the night,
That Our flag is still there

I'm living with war everyday
I'm living with war in my heart everyday
I'm living with wat right now.

WEDNESDAY MORNING UPDATE: REVIEW IS POSTED

I finished my review of the album-- after just one listen through. It's right here.

JEB BRADLEY-- A RUBBER-STAMP NEW HAMPSHIRE REPUBLICAN WHO'S GOT TO GO

There are plenty of reasons to oppose Jeb Bradley's re-election bid in New Hampshire in November. Bradley has been a real whore when it's come to vacuuming up bribes from the worst elements of the Republican Culture of Corruption-- with thousands and thousands of dollars flooding into his campaign coffers from scum like DeLay, Boehner, Blunt, Ney... And in return, of course, Bradley has been the perfect little rubber-stamping Republican robot-- a dependable vote when DeLay needed ethics rules gutted, a dependable vote when Bush needed congressional approval for his harebrained schemes to destroy the middle class and embroil us in his cockamamie crusades around the world.

There are 4 Democrats vying to take on Bradley in November: Rye School Board Vice-Chairman Gary Dodds, Rochester Democratic chairwoman, a progressive, Carol Shea-Porter, 3-term state legislatorPeter Sullivan of Manchester, and NH Democratic House Leader James Craig, a moderate who has no campaign website yet but is, more or less, the state party organization favorite.

NH-01 encompasses the southeastern third of the state and includes Manchester and Portsmouth, the 2 biggest cities. Although New Hampshire as a whole voted narrowly for Kerry in 2004, massive GOP electoral tampering delivered this district to Bush (by the barest of margins). Recently Congressman Rubber Stamp gave flinty residents, as well as less flinty ones, another reason to vote against him. Our pals at the Center For American Progress pointed out a very misleading editorial sneaky Jeb wrote for the Manchester Union-Leader when he got back from a "fact-finding" trip to Iraq in January. Actually, he wasn't looking for facts; he was looking for excuses to back up the far right's lies and distortions about what's going on in Iraq.

You know their ridiculous meme about how everything's coming up roses in Iraq and it's only the cowardly, treasonous, liberal media (presumably, including the 90 or so who have been killed covering it plotting against America over there) who lie and say something is awry or amiss... or something not good? Well Bradley has been pushing that line of crap and he tried to hoodwink New Hampshire residents into believing it.

You can read Congressman Rubber Stamp's whole editorial right here. He claimed that the troops are concerned about the media coverage back home and how all anyone hears is a bunch of bad news. He somehow neglected to mention that his own plane-- carrying half a dozen congresscritters-- had to take evasive action to avoid a shoulder held missle fired at it as it was coming in for a landing in Baghdad. I wonder if Bradley thought the Iraqis were just throwing candies and flowers at his plane? He says he lied his ass off kept the incident on the down low because he only wanted to focus on the troops. OK, focus on them, Congressman Rubber Stamp! Get them the hell out of there because their problem isn't GOP claims about biased media; it's about the constant dangers they have to face. And for what? So George Bush can strut around claiming he's a war time president while wrecking America with impunity?

Yeah, yeah, yeah... but Bush ain't running in November and-- alas-- he ain't running in the September 12th primary. So what are we gonna do? The only way to get to Bush is to defeat Jeb Bradley. And the best way to do that is to offer up a clear, clear choice. And the polar opposite of Bradley is Carol Shea-Porter. She has a very compelling life story, one that makes leaves no doubt exactly why she is a progressive Democrat and why she believes that together people can accomplish so much for the common good. I hope you'll read it and feel as inspired as I did. And she doesn't beat around the bush or triangulate when it comes to her positions. Her positions are the grassroots, progressive positions and they are the opposite of the Inside-the-Beltway scumbag positions. Carol's going to be an independent-minded Democrat in Congress, not a rubber-stamper... not for anyone.

CARTMAN WOULD BE A FITTING VP NOMINEE FOR EITHER BILL FRIST OR JOE BIDEN-- AND WHO WOULD JESUS CRAP ON?

I've had my favorite TV show-- in fact the only TV show I watch with any regularity-- on my mind since early this morning when someone sent me an e-mail about some DLC hack writing another in a long series of attack pieces against Howard Dean in the crappy rightist rag The New Republic(an). More carping junk from the most out-of-touch Inside-the-Beltway pukes there are who are still pissed off that Dean was elected to head the DNC and that the Inside-the-Beltway DLC shills were thoroughly rejected-- very thoroughly. Anyway, the nonsense in TNR that got my attention this morning was this: "They had all these fucking hippies.... These are people that are great to raise a few $500 checks, plan a party at a nightclub. But they're not the folks you need to give you [the resources] to do the things you want to do." And here I was always thinking Eric Cartman was a Republican (except when he's actually a Nazi), but all along he was actually a DLC Democrat!

I didn't think much about it. I mean Cartman a Nazi? A Republican? A DLC creep? What difference does it make except around the margins. They're all anti-humanity. I just let it go. And now I read that Comedy Central has decided to censor SOUTH PARK! No this isn't about Tom Cruise being gay or about Tom Cruise being a Scientologist or about Tom Cruise at all. This time it's about... Muhammad!

I think Trey and Matt got really pissed too because they substituted the banned images of Muhammad with an unbanned picture of Jesus Christ taking a dump on George Bush. Not just taking a dump on Bush but also on... (gasp) the American flag!

Comedy Central-- not eager to be the next Denmark-- said they had censored the cartoon out of a concern for public safety. Meanwhile SOUTH PARK's second biggest critic (after Tom Cruise), a religionist loon named Bill Donohue, is demanding that the cartoonists resign (not because of Muhammed but because of Jesus). Last week SOUTH PARK won a Peabody Award-- Bill O'Reilly never did-- because it reminded the award givers "of the need for being tolerant."

MORE GENERALS CALL FOR RUMSFELD'S HIDE-- BUT ONLY THE PATRIOTIC ONES WHO LOVE AMERICA

Although I'm not a huge fan of his politically, I found Wes Clark a genuinely pleasant fellow to talk with-- smart, well-informed, polite, opinionated but easy-going, all that. I don't drink-- never tasted a beer in my life-- but if I did, I'd certainly rather share a couple with General Clark than with the Texas schmuck-face in the White House. When I did talk with Clark a few months back, one thing he said will always stick with me. Retired military officers have to be exceptionally brave, even courageous, to speak out against the Regime. Bush hasn't had any of the ones who do killed but Clark told me that retired generals who speak out have a lot to lose, socially and economically. There's even a danger pariah-hood inside the exclusive little fraternity of ex-generals.

So it's amazing to me to see another general almost every day coming out so strongly about Rumsfeld resigning being fired. Of course when I woke up this morning, CNN had managed to dig up some general to act as a Rumsfeld apologist. But the real news is that nearly every day another retired general steps forward and tells the public what anyone paying attention should have guessed long ago: Rumsfeld's the wrong man for the job and he should retire-- fast.

The former head of the 82nd Airborne, Maj. Gen. Charles Swannack says Rumsfeld "micromanaged the generals who are leading our forces there" and that he "carries way too much baggage with him... We need a new Secretary of Defense." Not counting Army General Eric Shinseki, whose career Rumsfeld destroyed because of his dissension, Swannack joins Generals Newbold, Eaton, Zinni, Batiste and Riggs in calling for the much-hated Rumsfeld to step aside.

Congressmen who are close with the actual military-- as opposed to the Bush Regime shills installed at the Pentagon-- have been telling us for some time that the armed services are uncomfortable with Rumsfeld's bizarre... leadership. Speaking about the general consensus General Riggs said “everyone pretty much thinks Rumsfeld and the bunch around him should be cleared out.” Last week Lt. General Newbold penned a startling essay in TIME Magazine called "Why Iraq Was A Mistake-- A Military Insider Sounds Off Against The War and The Zealots Who Pushed It." Last month General Paul Eaton did a similar story for the NY TIMES called "For His failures, Rumsfeld Must Go," a chilling story of coercion and ineptness.

Former CENTCOM Commander General Anthony Zinni has been on TV a lot, talking about what a catastrophe the Bush Regime has been for the military and the whole nation and putting the lie to the right-wing talking points. Does Bush have the will-- or the balls-- to get rid of Rumsfeld? Not a chance. He may be a piece of shit Secretary of Defense but he's Bush's piece of shit Secretary of Defense-- and he's exactly the right man for the worst president in the history of our nation.


FRIDAY MORNING UPDATE: AOL & THE NY TIMES NOTICE TOO

When I woke up and logged on to AOL the front page had a clickable story from the NEW YORK TIMES talking about how all these retired generals are calling for Rumsfeld's resignation. There's nothing new in it however what fascinated me was the accompanying poll. The poll asks 2 questions. First: "Should Donald Rumsfeld stay on as defense secretary?" And after that "Do you think Rumsfeld will keep his job until the end of President Bush's second term?" Predictably 77% of respondents thought Rumsfeld should retire or be fired, showing he is even less popular than Bush (though somewhat more popular than Dick Cheney or Paris Hilton). But what was more interesting is that 63% of respondents think that Bush will hold onto the incompetent and venal, deceitful Rumsfeld 'til the bitter end. That's our Bush: the worst man ever installed in the White House! And the only Senator who has the balls to call him on it is Russ Feingold (with some support from Boxer and Harkin).


WEDNESDAY UPDATE: MORE PEOPLE THINK RUMSFELD SHOULD BE FIRED

Chuck Hagel was never a general. He was a grunt, one that was severely wounded in Vietnam fighting on the frontlines. Now he's a conservative Republican senator from one of the only 4 states in America where Bush has a positive approval rating, Nebraska. Monday, according to the Lincoln Journal Star, he said that "he shares the lack of confidence in Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld separately voiced by six retired generals. 'The concern I’ve had is, at a very dangerous time, (the) secretary of defense does not command the respect and confidence of our men and women in uniform,' Hagel said. 'There is a real question about his capacity to lead at this critical time'."

But not everyone agrees with that assessment. One of the Bush Regime's little Goebbels, Faux News loon Tony Snow (a possible replacement for Gannon/Guckert's White House client) told Bill O'Liely-- publicly and on TV in front of whoever watches that Republican propaganda outlet-- that people complaining about Donald Rumsfeld were partially to blame for high gas prices. Is he campaigning for the press secretary job? I bet Ann Coulter could do even better than Tony if he sets his mind to it.


SUNDAY NIGHT UPDATE: KERRY WON'T LET THE GENERALS BE SWIFT-BOATED

In a stirring speech given yesterday at Boston's hsitorical Fanueil Hall, John Kerry, let loose on the treacherous, weak Bush crew. "In recent weeks," said Kerry, "a number of retired high-ranking military leaders, several of whom played key combat or planning roles in Afghanistan and Iraq, have come forward publicly to call for the resignation of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. And across the administration, from the president on down, we've heard these calls dismissed or even attacked as acts of disloyalty, or as threats to civilian control of the armed forces. We have even heard accusations that this dissent gives aid and comfort to the enemy. That is cheap and it is shameful. And once again we have seen personal attacks on the character of those who speak out. How dare those who never wore the uniform in battle attack those who wore it all their lives - and who, retired or not, did not resign their citizenship in order to serve their country."

BUSH LYING US INTO NUCLEAR WAR WITH IRAN? 16 DAYS, 16 WORDS, 16 CANDLES-- IF BUSH SAYS IT, YOU CAN BE SURE OF ONE THING: IT'S A LIE

According to an L.A. Times poll out this morning, 48% of Americans-- even after all we've gone through and ARE going through in Iraq-- would support the Bush Regime's military plans in Iran IF they can be convinced Bush and Cheney and Condi and Rummy and the whole pack of liars are telling the truth about Iran making nuclear weapons. The same poll shows that at this point 54% of Americans feel that Bush will make the "wrong decision."

What does Bush want in Iran? It is clearly not about nuclear weapons. BushCo is lying about that-- lying as clearly as they lied about Saddam buying yellowcake in Niger. In an extensive interview with Amy Goodman, the man who broke the story about Bush's military plans in Iran, Sy Hersh, claims this is all about BushCo's obsession with Iranian regime change. The U.S. military and U.S. allies are all skeptical about Bush wanting to go after Iran in order to bring out regime change. Anyone who believes that a man who has systematically destroyed democracy in Florida and Ohio so he could seize office in Washington has any real interest in spurious claims about "spreading democracy" in the Middle East. Oil, of course is another matter. Iran has an awful lot of that too.

The 48% the L.A. Times found even thinking about supporting Bush's war plans scares the bejezus out of me. But just like Condi, with her "mushroom cloud over an American city" predictions fabrications in the run-up to the attack and occupation of Iraq, frightened people into believing we were going to war in self-defense (exactly what Hitler and Goebbels convinced the German people they were doing when they invaded Poland and Condi and Bush used Goebbel's playbook with practiced alacrity), today they have come up with "Iran could build a nuclear weapon in 16 days." This is patently false-- as they know. Josh Micah Marshall keeps track of the intricacies of how BushCo wages the propaganda war against reality in this matter and the Center For American Progress has all the actual facts about how long it will take Iran to build nuclear weapons IF they are planning to.

Others think that at this point oil, democracy, a nuclear-free Iran, terrorism, regime change... they're all fine but what the Bush Regime really cares about over and above all the rest is just political power. (just like the Iranian Regime). Not even political power on the world stage so much as political power to continue plucking dominating the richest turkey nation on earth. Think back to before Bush stole the 2000 election in Florida and how people were worried about a couple of oilmen running the country. What's happened since then? The wealthy no longer pay taxes and Americans pay BILLIONS AND BILLIONS more per year in oil (gasoline and heating fuel and related costs). That's the Bush economy: a redistribution of wealth from the masses to... the oil companies. It was predicted in 1999. BushCo doesn't want to give that lucrative situation up and if it takes a couple of wars-- hey it's our kids and a bunch of towelheads who are dying, not their kids or even their kind (who can always be counted on, like Bush and Cheney themselves to be cowardly and unpatriotic)-- why should they care? Wars make money too-- for them.

And still just 2 or 3 of our Democratic senators back Russ Feingold's moderate-- too moderate-- censure resolution. No wonder the Bush Regime thinks they can get away with this kind of stuff-- they can! People wonder why there was a low turn-out in recent key elections in Illinois and California. Maybe if people thought Democrats as a party would stand up against Bush-- rally stand up against him-- they would turn out to vote. Instead we see Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, Joe Lieberman, Evan Bayh, Chuck Schumer, Barack Obama too scared, too lame, too corrupted by Washington power, and too obsessed with triangulation to even approach the thresh-hold of leadership. None of these people are fit to be leaders, not of the Democratic Party anyway.

DID YOU THROW AWAY A LETTER FROM BARACK OBAMA TODAY TOO?

I got a huge stack of mail today. I was tempted to tell the postman to just chuck it into the garbage but he always says no when I tell him to and you never know-- maybe there is something I need to read between all the junk mail. In this case there wasn't and I chucked it all into the garbage myself. Except for one envelope. It wasn't especially work reading and it was most definitely junk mail but I decided to open it, albeit reluctantly, anyway.

It wasn't that long ago that a letter from Barack Obama would have gotten me all excited. Like with Macs, AOL, and iTunes I was an early adapter when it came to Obama. He was barely registered in the Illinois opinion polls when I sent my first check to his campaign. And when I met him in person the first time I wrote an even bigger one. But... that was then. Since then he's been a mixed bag as far as I'm concerned, and not a mixed bag I would write a check for.

The first alarm bell went off right after he took his seat. He voted to move class action law suits from state courts, where consumers and workers generally get a fair hearing, to federal courts, where corporations tend to get their way. But, the glow was still there and it was pretty much his first month on the job so I had no trouble cutting him a little slack. Even after he voted to confirm Condoleeza Rice I wasn't ready to write him off.

But then Obama wound up-- somehow-- with a mentor... the worst possible mentor one can imagine: Holy Joe, the Senate's biggest hypocrite and George W. Bush's favorite Democrat. In quick succession he started voting in a very corporate-friendly way. He voted to cut off debate (for cloture) on the nomination of one of Bush's worst-ever judicial nominees, Priscilla Owen. Eventually he pointlessly voted against her confirmation but-- as we saw later with Lieberman and Alito-- if you vote for cloture your eventual vote in the present circumstances is just a farce.

He's been working behind the scenes to get Democrats to not support Russ Feingold's very moderate resolution to censure Bush and a couple weeks ago he tried to inject some life into the Connecticut Democratic Party's Jefferson-Jackson dinner by pumping up his much-ignored mentor. Even if his elephant remark was a snide like jab-- maybe for Lieberman taking McCain's side against him in their rancorous and public dispute a few months ago-- Obama endorsed a relatively reactionary Lieberman in a primary where a real Democrat some say could be the next... Barack Obama is running. "I know that some in the party have differences with Joe," he said, all but silencing the crowd. "I'm going to go ahead and say it. It's the elephant in the room. And Joe and I don't agree on everything. But what I know is, Joe Lieberman's a man with a good heart, with a keen intellect, who cares about the working families of America." Those who hadn't passed out by that point then heard him say "I am absolutely certain that Connecticut's going to have the good sense to send Joe Lieberman back to the United States Senate."

That was the last I heard of smooth operator Obama until today. The letter bearing his signature-- and in an envelope with his name on the return address (not the name of the odious organization he was shilling for)-- was actually from the DSCC, one of the key bastions-- along with the DCCC and DLC-- of anti-grassroots Inside-the-Beltway power-mongering and political prostitution that helps turn people with Democratic values and ideals off to the Democratic Party (and political involvement).

So what were Obama and the DSCC wasting 39 cents on to communicate to me? A lot of brave Bush-bashing to the base that doesn't match up to action on Capitol Hill, complete with a scary photo of Bush and Rove. I fished it out of the wastepaper basket to write Senator Obama a note on it. I told him the photo worked in scaring me. But I also mentioned replacing it with images of Joe Lieberman, Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, and Rahm Emanuel was something that would ease my fears. I also suggested he not bother contacting me again until after he had signed on as a co-sponsor of Russ Feingold's censure resolution.

If you think the DSCC and the DCCC are getting it all wrong by pushing reactionary or Republican-lite candidates like Bob Casey in PA or by wrecking the career of true blue Democrats like Paul Hackett and Christine Cegelis, you can do what I did: contribute directly to actual progressive candidates or give to Russ Feingold's Progressive Patriots' Fund. Either way, you're welcome to do it through the DWTACT BLUE Page, where you will find independent Democratic voices like Ned Lamont, Jerry McNerney, Rick Penberthy, Chuck Pennacchio, Coleen Rowley, and Jan Schneider (among others).

BIG WIN FOR FRANCINE BUSBY. SHE WILL FACE REPUBLICAN LOBBYIST BRIAN BILBRAY JUNE 6

Other than the 10,000 or so absentee ballots left to be tabulated, the San Diego Registrar has declared that all votes cast in yesterday's special election to fill the congressional seat of imprisoned Republicrook Randy "Duke" Cunningham (convicted for his role in the Republican Culture of Corruption in DC) have been counted. The big winner: Francine Busby. With only about 30% of the registered voters having declared themselves Democrats, Busby was able to wind up with 43.97% of the vote. (The other Democrat in the election, Chris Young brings the total for Democrats to over 45%.)

The Republican in the race is likely to be corrupt lobbyist and carpetbagger Brian Bilbray, although the uncounted absentee ballots could still impact that decision. He drew 15.16% of the vote and his closest rival, Brian Roach got 14.43%. (The out-and-out fascist in the race, Howard Kaloogian, only eked out a dismal 7.39%, his blatantly racist appeals music to only 9,291 sets of ears. Altogether the Republicans spent over $5 million dollars in this once-safe GOP seat, although their top 3 vote getters combined didn't come close to Busby. The bad blood between the far, far right and the far right candidates will make it difficult for Republicans to unite by June.

The run-off will be part of California's regular June 6th primary, expected to bring more Democrats out to the polls. Today is day one of Busby's campaign She's going to need all the grassroots help she can get. Please consider even a small $10 or $20 contribution at the DWT ACT BLUE Page today.


ADDENDUM: ANOTHER SPECIAL ELECTION TO FILL THE SEAT OF ANOTHER CONVICTED REPUBLICAN LEADS TO A DEMOCRATIC WIN IN PA

The special election to fill the Pennsylvania state legislative seat in the 30th district saw a victory for the Democrat, Shawn Flaherty. It is the first time the 30th went to a Democratic in 40 years. The special election was called to replace convicted Republicrook Jeff Habay who was using his state office and state facilities and resources for campaigning, a criminal offense. He also sent himself some white powder in an attempt to frame an opponent. Habay is just one of a long, long list of Republican office holders who will be overcrowding American prison facilities as the GOP culture of corruption continues to unravel. (Hat Tip to RAW STORY on this one.)

BUSH'S FAR RIGHT ITALIAN ALLY, SILVIO BERLUSCONI, BITES THE DUST IN BITTER ELECTION VICTORY FOR A CENTER-LEFT COALITION

Last month "the Asian Berlusconi," Thai Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra, called a snap election. Why that appellation? Like Berlusconi, he's the richest man in the country-- Thailand's first billionaire-- and he owns a lot of the mass media; and he's corrupt, nepotistic and is suspected of rampant electoral fraud. He also has a distinct penchant for authoritarianism of the right wing variety. Some people also call him "the Asian George Bush." The opposition parties boycotted the flawed election and millions and millions of voters also boycotted. After the election, the king, who studiously avoids politics, told Thaksin that the party's over. And one of George Bush's staunchest allies in East Asia sailed off into the sunset.

Today it looks like another of Bush's staunchest allies-- his staunchest ally in Old Europe outside of the beleaguered Tony Blair-- has also been rejected by the voters. Silvio Berlusconi seems to be trying to hold onto power but even with reports of massive voter fraud from his far right coalition, he has also be rejected by the voters.

Berlusconi's right-wing coalition, which includes the fascist party, headed by Mussolini's granddaughter, had genuine backing in only 3 regions: Lombardi (which would like to secede, Venice and Sicily, where they like the way he does business). If you can handle Italian this is a website that shows results.

Berlusconi controls almost all of Italian television-- and he uses it even more transparently than the Bush Regime uses Fox and Clear Channel and other propaganda outlets in the U.S. He is considered a genius at selling himself-- on his TV stations, his radio networks and his newspapers. Interestingly, progressive consultant Joe Trippi was working for Prodi and the reactionary pollsters employed by Hillary Clinton, Penn, Schoen & Berland, were part of Berlusconi's team.

Prodi has promised to withdraw Italian troops from occupation duty in Iraq and it is generally assumed that his relationship with the U.S. will be as warm and close as ever, while his relationship with Bush and his Regime... more proper and less lovey-dovey.


WEDNESDAY MORNING UPDATE: ITALIAN REJECTION OF FASCISM VERY BAD NEWS FOR BUSH COVER-UP

With Bush having provided his fascist ally Berlusconi a platform to launch his doomed re-election bid-- an opportunity for a frivolous address to a joint session of Congress-- many think the new Prime Minister, Romano Prodi, may come clean with what Italian authorities know about the Bush Regime's conspiracy in manufacturing and disseminating the fake reports on Iraq trying to buy yellow cake uranium in Niger. Or will Prodi just work to get his head up Bush's butt? We'll get back to you on that.

NEWT GINGRICH-- CHEERLEADER OR RAT DESERTING A SINKING SHIP-- CAN'T SEEM TO MAKE UP HIS MIND ABOUT IRAQ

So today started with big news: Newt Gingrich, the disgraced former leader of the radical right in the House of Representatives, currently trying to rehabilitate himself for a run for the GOP presidential nomination against Bill Frist and John McCain, told faculty and students at the University of South Dakota that "It was an enormous mistake for us to try to occupy that country after June of 2003. We have to pull back, and we have to recognize it." He went on to basically endorse what John Murtha has been saying for months (without, of course, mentioning Murtha-- Gingrich being smart enough to stay out of the line of fire of someone as aggressively insane as Mean Jean Schmidt of Ohio)

Gingrich, a coward and a rat ready to abandon a ship he helped launch, now claims Bush's policy-- a policy he was an aggressive cheerleader for-- has been wrong for nearly 3 years. Any independent-thinker who dared to challenge the Bush Regime on Iraq was promptly and viciously dubbed unpatriotic by Gingrich and the radical rightists around him-- with Fox's big megaphone at his disposal whenever he wanted it.

Should we welcome Gingrich out of the Darkness and into the Light? Don't be absurd. He's a partisan reactionary hack, utterly contemptible and untrustworthy, jockeying for position in advance of his ludicrous run for the presidency. Today when Ed Schultz asked for an interview about his Iraq-occupation-was-wrong statement, Gingrich hid under his bed and refused to come out. With her usual eloquence and aplomb, Jane points out that Gingrich is essentially nothing but a stinking war pimp who should be greeted on the streets of America not with candies and flowers but with rotten tomatoes and cabbages.

And now Gingrich has further muddied up the waters by claiming he was misquoted on Sean Hannity's Republican radio infomercial. Presumably by the time Hannity is ready for his TV propaganda show, Gingrich will have concocted a new version of what happened.

REPUBLICAN EFFORTS TO STEAL A SENATE SEAT FOR JOHN SUNUNU IN NEW HAMPSHIRE WERE ORCHESTRATED BY KEN MEHLMAN AND THE WHITE HOUSE

Can someone who lives and breathes a lie every single day of his life-- gay Republican closet queen/Party Chief Ken Mehlman-- even know when he's telling the truth or making up stories? Although Mehlman swore to the press that the GOP has a "zero-tolerance policy" for any Republican official caught trying to block legitimate voters, the case of voter fraud showed clearly that Mehlman is as likely to lie to the public about electoral matters as he is to lie to the GOP homophobic "Christian conservative" base about his sexual orientation. "The position of the Republican National Committee is simple: We will not tolerate fraud; we will not tolerate intimidation; we will not tolerate suppression. No employee, associate or any person representing the Republican Party who engages in these kinds of acts will remain in that position." It was all a big lie. In fact, they have paid millions of dollars in hush money (in the form of legal bills-- exactly what Mehlman suggested the RNC would not do) to keep the New England Republican campaign staffers from linking electoral shenanigans directly to the Bush White House. Their efforts failed.

The Republican Party policy of subverting democracy by tampering with the electoral process has lead to several convictions of GOP honchos in New Hampshire. Yesterday the mainstream media reported (at once wide but shallow) how successful Republican efforts-- led by former BushCheney New England campaign chairman/convicted felon James Tobin-- to steal a senate seat in New Hampshire for right-wing rubber-stamper John Sununu in 2002 were coordinated from the White House-- by Mehlman himself, then a White House political operative.

This morning Howard Dean-- as chairman of the DNC, Mehlman's counterpart-- sent Mehlam a letter, asking "No Tolerance" Ken for some explanations about his and the Republican Party's conduct in this matter.

Dear Ken,
Yesterday, the AP ran a story entitled "Phone Jamming Records Point to White House." This story provides new details about the role of the New Hampshire Republican Party in the phone-jamming scandal and raises serious questions as to whether the RNC and the White House were actively involved.
As you know, on Election Day, a telemarketer hired by the New Hampshire GOP jammed telephone lines at five state Democratic and one firefighters union get-out-the-vote phone banks. The AP noted yesterday that the "records show that Bush campaign operative James Tobin, who recently was convicted in the case, made two dozen calls to the White House within a three-day period around Election Day 2002 - as the phone jamming operation was finalized, carried out and then abruptly shut down."
The AP story also stated that virtually all the calls to the White House went to the same number (202-456-6173) which currently rings inside the political affairs office. Although the White House declined today to say which staffer was assigned that phone number in 2002, you may be able to shed some light on the subject, as you were the White House Political Director during that time.
You have often spoken of the importance of making sure that every vote counts. In that spirit, we hope that you will take the necessary steps to clear up the lingering confusion surrounding the RNC and the White House's role in this scandal by answering these questions:
* James Tobin called the White House two dozen times in three days. Whom was he calling? With whom did he speak? Whom did he work with in the office of political affairs?
* Tobin worked directly with Terry Nelson, who was then political director at the RNC. When will Mr. Nelson answer questions about his role in the scandal? Whom else at the RNC did Tobin work with?
* Did the White House authorize this phone jamming scheme and, if so, who specifically did so? Or was the phone jamming authorized by the RNC?
* Was anyone on the White House staff or at the RNC involved in concocting, authorizing, implementing or concealing this scheme?
The overt effort by the New Hampshire Republican Party to suppress the vote on Election Day in 2002 is unconscionable. The people of New Hampshire deserve an apology. And America deserves to know exactly how deeply the White House and the RNC were involved in the planning and execution of this scheme. We hope you will provide the answers we need so we can move forward together.

Sincerely,

Governor Howard Dean, MD
Chairman

This is not a case of Schadenfreude. It's far more serious. It crossed the minds of many progressives that one of our heroes, Minnesota Senator Paul Wellstone, may have been murdered when a small private plane crashed while he was campaigning for re-election. Some will always believe it was a rightist conspiracy. For others it is too horrible to contemplate. Meanwhile, all evidence proves without any doubt that BushCheney efforts at vote rigging stole the 2000 presidential election in Florida (where Al Gore had thousands of more votes than Bush but where Katherine Harris in her outrageous dual role and Secretary of State and head of the BushCheney Florida campaign was able to subvert the will of Floridians) and again in Ohio in 2004 (where Ohio Secretary of State/BushCheney Campaign Chairman Kenneth Blackwell did the same thing). As desperate as the already illegitimate Bush Regime was to control the U.S. Senate would it come as a great shock to you that they managed to steal the election for a loyal party hack?

If you really want to get into the details of this particular episode of a weak and thoroughly corrupt Republican Party trying to undermine the will of the voters, you can find the raw documents and evidence right here. Isn't the internet an amazing thing? God knows what they must have gotten away with in the past!

FL-05: GRASSROOTS ACTION MAKES A DIFFERENCE

Rick Penberthy's campaign in rural central Florida-- when I interviewed him, he told me that the biggest town in the district is Spring Hill and he got really passionate when he talked about how to combat depletion of the acquifer-- is blessed because the DCCC failed to recognize the opportunity for defeating a rubber-stamp Republican bozo, Ginny Brown-Waite. So instead of recruiting some Inside-the-Beltway corporate shill, like he has all up and down Florida, Emanuel just let FL-05 alone, happy enough to watch a moderate, grassroots Fighting Dem-- Rick Penberthy-- emerge as a rallying point for Democrats and independents. The race is still very much under the radar from a national perspective.

Meanwhile Rick has been hard at work. Not having to fend off an Inside-the-Beltway challenge (and those anti-grassroots challenges come with huge amounts of money and endorsements from mindless-- in terms of doing whatever Boss Emanuel tells them to do-- whores like Steny Hoyer, John Kerry, Nancy Pelosi and other big name Democratic celebrities who apparently know no shame), Rick has been able to take a somewhat novel approach to getting on the ballot.

Instead of just paying the filing fee, he made a point of getting out into the sprawling district and collecting signatures on petitions-- and old fashioned but effective way to meet the thousands of residents up close. Monday the Florida Depratment of Elections in Tallahassee declared that he had qualified for the September 5th Democratic primary. Although his whole campaign team was out in the field for months collecting signatures, Penberthy made a point of personally going up and meeting voters and asking for their support and hearing what they had to say. He collected over 3,000 signatures himself.

“It has been a tremendous opportunity to talk with voters all across the district,” Penberthy said. “There have been many different stories, but one thing I hear over and over again is the growing concern that the Republicans in Congress aren’t listening to their concerns, don’t share their values, and they want a change. Unfortunately career politicians, like my opponent, Ginny Brown-Waite, often get caught up in the business of professional politics and lose touch with their constituents. It’s time for that change. We’re tremendously encouraged by this strong showing of grassroots support. I’m extremely grateful to the voters of the 5th District who continue to support this campaign.” Rick feels a sense of connection with the concerns of the people he met. He shared one story with DWT:

You know, when we were out meeting people, doing the hard groundwork
it takes to run an honest congressional campaign, I had the privilege
of meeting many fine Americans. Collecting petitions can be merely
asking for a signature or it can be a conversation with a fellow voter
about the future of our country. Up in Citrus County, while I was out
meeting voters, a woman saw me collecting petitions and initiated a
conversation. Her nephew had recently been killed while serving in
Iraq. She told me that her family's loss brought the war right to her
doorstep and into her home, and that if every American could see the
sacrifice that our young men and women are making for us, that the
direction of this country would be very different. As we continued
speaking, incredibly, underneath her pain, there was optimism.
Optimism for honest government, better security policies, and optimism
for peace. This is one story, out of over 3,000 I personally heard
during the ballot petition process. I'm ready to take her voice to
Washington because I truly believe that our government can once again
be the voice of the people. I've heard the people's voice and the
peoples voice has been lost under Virginia Brown-Waite.

This is what grassroots democracy is all about and if this is an accurate indictaion of what kind of a congressman Rick Penberthy is going to be, residents of Florida's 5th congressional district have another good reason to elect him (above and beyond how extreme their current rubber-stamp rep has been for her whole time in the House of Representatives). Rick Penberthy's life-experience, intelligence and accomplishments are going to make him a great congressman for Citrus, Lake, Marion, Pasco, Hernando, Polk and Sumpter counties-- and a great congressman for anyone in America concerned about what direction Bush and his rubber-stamp Republicans have taken the country. If you want to help, please consider contributing to Rick' campaign at the DWT ACT BLUE Page or by volunteering for his campaign here.

PENNSYLVANIA DEMOCRATIC PRIMARIES COMING UP MAY 16

Pennsylvania has 19 congressional seats and a U.S. Senate seat in the November election, making it one of the most important battle grounds in the country. Rick Santorum, one of the most narrow-minded, bigoted, extreme right-wing and corrupt of anyone in the entire Congress, is widely thought to be the incumbent senator with the least chance for survival. Currently among the 19 House members 11 are Republicans, all of the rubber-stamp variety. Not a single one ever stands up against the extremist Bush-DeLay-Boehner agenda. Several of these rubber-stamp Republicans are thought to be in as much jeopardy from the voters as is Santorum, particularly Jim Gerlach (PA-06), Curt Weldon (PA-07), and Mike Fitzpatrick (PA-08) and possibly Phil English (PA-03).

There is a very bitter primary race among Democrats to oppose Santorum. The Inside-the-Beltway establishment candidate is a right-of-center Democrat with a big-name daddy, State Treasure Bob Casey (whose father was a beloved governor). He would probably prefer to be a governor himself but Chuck Schumer of the DSCC (and the current governor, Ed Rendell) imposed on recruited him to run against the much-hated Santorum. Not many Democrats are aware that Casey is anti-choice and, no doubt, Santorum-- also virulently anti-choice-- is hoping (and plotting) that closer to November Democratic women and progressives will find out about this and other reactionary Casey positions that will cause disillusionment and revulsion and hold down turnout among Democrats. Schumer doesn't seem to see this as a danger, and hopefully in November people won't be saying he had his head up his ass. I am worried that by electing Casey-- if that is even possible-- the Democrats will be creating another Zell Miller or Joe Lieberman or Ben Nelson, Democrats who tend to vote with Republicans on crucial issues. During the heated debate over Bush's extreme right-wing Supreme Court nomination, Sam Alito, Casey gratuitously chimed in that he would have voted to confirm Alito, something that was done by only 4 Democrats-- all in red states-- and something that even a sole Republican moderate, Lincoln Chafee, could not bring himself to do.

The progressive alternative to Casey is Chuck Pennacchio, although Schumer and the DSCC has been spectacularly successful in portraying Casey as THE Democrat running against Santorum and, with the lazy and superficial mass media, has given Casey's candidacy an air of inevitability. It's a damn shame because come November, more and more Democrats are going to find out that Casey is a kind of "Santorum-lite." Pennacchio's positions and values are Democratic positions and values. He would make a much better Senator. Another excellent progressive, Alan Sandals, is also in the May 16th primary, although he seems even a longer shot against Casey than Pennacchio is.

There are several Democratic primary races for House seats on May 16th as well. None of the 8 Democratic incumbents are in jeopardy in 2006. And of the Republicans, the most likely to lose is Jim Gerlach in the northwest Philadelphia suburbs (Ardmore, Norristown, Pottstown, Coatesville). Last year he barely won-- with less than 50% of the vote-- against Lois Murphy, who is poised to beat him this year. She's a solid candidate who has been endorsed by both progressive grassroots Democrats as well as the Inside-the-Beltway power-mongers. An even further left Democrat, Mike Liebowitz hasn't generated enough enthusiasm to make him a serious contender against Murphy. PA-06 is a moderate suburban district-- the kind of district that abandoned the Republican candidates in Virginia and New Jersey en masse in 2005-- and Lois fits the district a lot better than the extreme far right Gerlach or the somewhat more liberal Liebowitz. Gerlach consistently tries to pass himself off as a moderate -- although pro-choice supporters know he is as radical and extreme as DeLay and any garden variety far right fanatic. And when it comes to selling out his constituents to Big Business and to the radical DeLay agenda, Gerlach is considered one of the 3 or 4 easiest lays in the House. Jim Gerlach defines rubber-stamp Republican.

Between PA-06 (Montgomery County) and the New Jersey border is PA-08, primarily Bucks County. It goes from Croydon, Bristol and Levittown up through Doylestown and Quakertown. The seat is current held by another arch rubber-stamper, Mike Fitzpatrick won the seat in 2004 with 55% of the vote. In all likelihood he will face a far stronger challenge in November from Patrick Murphy, the archetypal "Fighting Dem." I fell in love with Murphy's candidacy when I noticed that he is one of the only DCCC-blessed challengers who had the balls to ignore Rahm Emanuel's instance that no one say a word about Iraq. Instead of embarrassingly ignoring the issue, like too many Democrats, Murphy-- a decorated Iraq vet and former West Point professor-- took the bull by the horns the way progressives wish Emanuel and the DCCC would. From his website: "When Rep. John Murtha, the first Vietnam combat veteran elected to Congress, started the debate on America’s role in Iraq by saying 'Our troops have done all they can do,' he was right. Our troops toppled the Saddam Regime and made sure that there were no WMDs. It is time to change the direction in Iraq, and we need to start bringing our men and women home now.
Patrick believes in a responsible exit strategy, with benchmarks and a timeline, which encourages the Iraqis to stand up on their own, brings our men and women home, and most importantly, closes this chapter of our history and refocuses our efforts to win the War on Terror." Every Democrat running for Congress should tell Rahm Emanuel to go to hell and take a clear, ethical, reasonable-- and popular-- stand the way Murphy has. His stands on other issues are consistent-- pro-choice, pro-environment, in favor of balancing the budget and saving Medicare and Social Security from the deprecations of the Far Right.

Yesterday's Philadelphia Inquirer has a spectacular story on Patrick Murphy, which makes it clear why he would make an exceptionally great U.S. congressman and details his transformation from a naive Bush supporter in 2000 to a dedicated Kerry backer in 2004. "I fell for it when he said he was a compassionate conservative. I can't compound a mistake by doing nothing about it. I tried to change it in 2004," having grown disillusioned with the Bush Regime while he was in Iraq. "The administration wasn't looking out for us," he said.

Before Murphy can get to Fitzpatrick he has to defeat former Bucks County Commissioner-- and recent Republican convert-- Andrew Warren. Warren's website looks good and his positions look progressive, but friends in the district tell me his current positions ring somewhat hollow. In any case, the district's official Democratic club overwhelmingly endorsed Murphy last month.

The third of Pennsylvania's "big 3" pits former Admiral Joe Sestak against a right wing Moonie nut case, reeking of corruption, Curt Weldon. There is no primary and Democrats, independents and sane Republicans have rallied to Sestak's campaign.

In the northwest corner of the state (Erie), PA-03 is going to see a rematch of 2004, with Doctor Steven Porter taking on Congressman Gluttony, Phil English. In 2004 English was able to beat Porter with a campaign of outrageous lies and innuendo. Porter, who was accused of everything from wanting to force drunks to undergo sterilization to prohibiting hunting, is prepared for his sleaze this time and with volunteers and some financing a truly progressive and serious-minded Porter could rid the congress of a rubber-stamp dullard who has disgraced his office.

Although Democrats are also challenging Republican incumbents in PA-05 (north central Pennsylvania from State College, Lock Haven and Oil City, right up to the New York border-- John Peterson v Don Hilliard), PA-09 (south central PA from the western outskirts of Harrisburg to Altoona and Connellsville-- Bill Shuster v Paul Politis, PA-10 (the northeast corner of the state, around Carbondale and Williamsport down to Sunbury-- Don Sherwood v "Fighting Dem" Chris Carney, PA-16 (the extreme southeast corner of the state from Reading and West Chester down to Maryland-- Joseph Pitts v Lois Herr, and PA-19 (a southern district that includes Gettysburg, Hanover, Carlisle, Mechanicsburg and the western suburbs of Harrisburg-- Todd Platts v "Fighting Dem" Phil Avillo, none of these districts have primaries.

There are Democratic primaries coming up in PA-18 (the suburbs south of Pittsburgh where wingnut Tim Murphy will have to face either Chad Kluko or progressive Tom Kovach) and PA-04 (the northern suburbs of Pittsburgh up to New Castle where Melissa Hart will have to face whoever wins the primary contest between progressive Jason Altmire and Georgia Berner). And just as I was about to put this up I Chris Bowers over at MyDD reported that the Democrats finally came up with a strategy to have someone-- Charles Dertinger-- run agaist wingnutia rubber-stamper Chares Dent in PA-15.

The DWT ACT BLUE Page is accepting contributions on behalf of Lois Murphy, Patrick Murphy, Steven Porter and Joe Sestak for the House and on behalf on Chuck Pennacchio for the Senate. Be part of a grassroots movement of people putting in $10 and $20 at a time to give us a government that a country we love and cherish as much as America deserves-- instead of one that is bought and paid for by the corrupt special interests that have brought us the nightmare of George W. Bush, Tom DeLay, Rick Santorum and the rubber-stamp Republican Congress.

DENIAL IS MORE THAN A RIVER IN THE 22nd CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT OF TEXAS

It didn't take long for the right wing echo chamber on GOP radio and TV to come to the aid of poor old, put upon, Tom Delay.

It seems that Tom was merely busy doing God's work and that the evil Librals, along with the satanic media, attacked him for no reason!

As for the news that three of Delay's former toadies have already plead guilty to crimes and are cooperating in the investigation?

Why, if anything, Tom is guilty of trusting people who went too far on their own....

Yes, they make that claim with a straight face.

The man known as the 'Hammer,' who was a hands-on demagogue to the thunderous applause of  the GOP's "Cracker Nation" and who ran the House as his own personal fiefdom, didn't have a clue as to what his closest aides were up to for all these years?

It sounds like bullshit when 'Kenny Boy' Lay argues it as a part of his Enron trial defense and it really sounds like bullshit when Tom Delay's high dollar lawyers spout it.

But are we all being too hard on the fallen Prince of Sugarland?

Are his troubles truly all behind him?

Despite attempts on the part of Republican spin doctors to paint Delay's resignation from Congress as the end of the agony, what exactly is the status of his problems with the Texas legal system?

Here is a reminder of the troubles Delay still faces in his home state.

The meat of the indictment sought by the District Attorney of Travis County and handed down by a Grand Jury of Texas citizens is "Texans for a Republican Majority PAC" (TRMPAC), which DeLay founded and which his closest aides and family members ran. Delay himself organized and headlined fundraisers, made fundraising calls, took part in strategic planning sessions and even personally collected corporate checks.

In a recent Texas civil trial the court ruled that TRMPAC illegally collected and spent $532,333 in corporate cash and violated Texas law by not reporting it.

Included within that illegal $532,333 was $190,000 that TRMPAC sent to the Republican National Committee (RNC) in September of 2002.

Here are the facts from that case:

*On September 10, 2002, DeLay's co-defendant, John Colyandro, sent a blank check to co-defendant Jim Ellis.

*On September 13, 2002, Ellis handed over the check in question to the RNC. Ellis made out the check for $190,000 and gave the RNC a list of seven candidates for the Texas House, along with designated contributions they were to receive.

*On September 20 the $190,000 was deposited by the RNC into a corporate cash account.

*On October 2, Ellis met with DeLay at DeLay's Capitol office. That same day the RNC generated seven internal memos requesting seven different checks to the TRMPAC candidates designated in Ellis's original request.

*On October 4 seven checks totaling $190,000 were cut from a noncorporate GOP account. The checks were numbered 7470 through 7476.

Corporate contributions to candidates in Texas are illegal. Such a contribution is a third-degree felony. A contribution is defined as a direct or indirect transfer of money, including the agreement to make such a transfer. Anyone who participated in an agreement to indirectly transfer $190,000 in corporate cash to Texas candidates has broken Texas law.

Delay's lawyers have argued that TRMPAC gave contributions to state legislative candidates across the country. What they fail to mention is that the Texas TRMPAC candidates received checks ranging from $20,000 to $40,000 while the next largest contribution made to a state legislative candidate was $2,000.

Depending on when he is asked,  Delay has claimed that (1) He knew about the $190,000 beforehand; (2) That he heard about it after the fact; (3) That he did, in fact, discuss it with Ellis on October 2, 2002.

When asked during a recent interview about his feeling upon retiring from the House of Representatives, Delay quoted Dr. Martin Luther King's famous phrase, "Free at last. Free at last. Great God Almighty I'm free at last."

Perhaps Delay should have considered another quote from the man that he and his right wing allies have reviled so many times in the past. Could it be that Mr. Delay would be better off heeding the following piece of advice from Dr. King:

"Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity."

 
-Rozius

PA-03: NOT ONE ANYONE IS TALKING ABOUT THIS YEAR-- BUT THEY SHOULD. STEVEN PORTER CAN BEAT CONGRESSMAN GLUTTONY

Very little has been said this year about Phil English and the chances of replacing him in PA's 3rd congressional district (Erie down to Meadville, Sharon and Butler and some of the northern suburbs of Pittsburgh). A few years ago, English, a right wing imbecile, a total rubber-stamper and a hugely obese slug who is never seen without a donut or a sandwich or slice of pizza being shoveled into his open maw, was considered one of the most vulnerable Republicans in Pennsylvania. All but two of the GOP incumbents who managed to get re-elected with relatively tight margins in 2004--Charlie Dent (59%) and Phil English (60%)-- have been targeted by the DCCC in a big way this year: Michael Fitzpatrick (55%), Curt Weldon (59%), and Jim Gerlach (51%). None of the professional prognosticators seem to think English is in any danger.

In November he will be facing Steven Porter again-- his opponent from 2004. Dr. Porter has been an active diarist on Daily Kos. In 2004 Porter received 40% of the vote despite being outspent 6-1 by Congressman Gluttony and despite being virtually ignored by the DCCC. The DLC types don't seem to mind English all that much. Like them he's a huge free trade booster-- even though the 3rd CD has suffered mightily at the hands of NAFTA and outsourcing.

English was successful in starting a vicious whispering campaign against Porter that he advocated sterilizing alcoholics and banning hunting. Though both charges were false, they had an impact on voters and Congressman Gluttony is reviving them as truisms again. (When he announced his candidacy this year, Porter forcefully addressed the lies and misrepresentations Congressman Gluttony heaped on him. "Sterilization. I am not now nor have I ever been in favor of the forced sterilization of anyone; nor have any of my writings ever advocated the sterilization of people against their will."

On the issues, Porter is as good a match for northwest Pennsylvania as Congressman Gluttony is a bad one. The district, adjacent to some of the hardest hit areas of Ohio, has been in a downturn ever since Bush and the Republican rubber-stamp Congress have implemented their devastating economic policies-- or devastating to working and middle class Americans anyway. Unemployment is high there and good skilled industrial jobs have been replaced-- if at all-- by low wage service jobs, the #1 hallmark of the Bush economy.

Compare the platforms of the two candidates and you are unlikely to find two clearer examples of the differences between a grassroots progressive and a corporate reactionary. A stalwart supporter of Tom DeLay, Roy Blunt and John Boehner, Congressman Gluttony has made his fat ass right at home in the Republican Culture of Corruption, even going so far as to run-- unsuccessfully-- for the head of the NRCC. English has been sucking up money from DeLay, Boehner and Abramoff and consistently voting to weaken ethics rules in the House. Porter sees the type of behavior English is guilty of as a threat to the foundations of our democratic system. "Of all the things Congress can do to preserve the American democracy, campaign finance reform is the most important. Government today has become a sale in which office holders are bought in exchange for the money to run their election campaigns. This has created a spider web of special interests and has led to the conviction on the part of many Americans that the votes of the people no longer matter."

Porter supports a woman's right to choice. Congressman Glutton opposes it-- always. Porter believes in equality under the law for gay men and women. The Hog-Who-Walks-Upright is a vicious and persistent homophobe.
 
English supports the rights of corporations to import cheap labor and to export good jobs. Porter has actual plans to help reinvigorate the economy of northwestern Pennsylvania. Unlike English, he is not satisfied with NAFTA and CAFTA and all that bullshit, something on which he stands with progressives and against reactionaries of both political parties, including, ominously, the ones with their fingers on the spigots of DCCC finances.

English has been a rubber-stamp for Bush's catastrophic Iraq policies and his outrageous environmental policies. Porter is a committed environmentalist and someone who would never let a president of either party just ride roughshod over the Constitution, not when it comes to waging war or to domestic spying or to any of the deprecations of the BushCheney Regime that English has unswervingly supported.

Porter's statement of healthcare alone should be enough of a reason to replace English with him. "The skyrocketing cost of health care and prescription drugs is putting the very survival of our people bbeyond the reach of millions. It is also one of the factors leading to the outsourcing of jobs to labor markets where the employer has no health care responsibility for workers. The reason why solutions to the health care problem do not emerge is because the legislators who might enact such solutions are owned by the health care and insurance industries. My opponent has taken hundreds of thousands of dollars from these industries in exchange for votes which keep the cost of medical care and prescription drugs higher by far than they are for the people of other nations. The answer to our health care problems is a universal, single-payer, not-for-profit health care system which is run not by the government but by physicians themselves. Such a system was recently proposed in the Journal of the American Medical Association... and it has been proposed as legislation in the House of Representatives as HR 676."

And, of course, their views on taxation are diametrically opposed. English is all about tax breaks for multimillionaires and corporations. Porter advocates an entirely different approach. "In 1960, the corporations of America paid about 24% of all Federal income taxes. Today that rate has dropped to 8%. The difference has been shifted onto the backs of America’s middle class. Currently we have a policy in Washington, a policy for which my opponent has voted, in which the wealthiest individuals and the wealthiest corporations pay less and less and get back more and more. Just this year it has been stated that 60% of American corporations paid nothing in Federal income taxes. Profits made on foreign soil can be deferred from taxation year after year. The largest estates are exempt from taxation when they change hands. And all these tax breaks serve ultimately to deprive the government of revenue so that it, in turn, cuts services to the people. Moreover, when the Federal government cuts revenues to the states, the states have no choice but to raise state and local taxes and cut state services. The most unfair and damaging example of this is what happens to our local schools. The Fed cuts state money, so the state cuts state aid to schools thus forcing local property taxes up and school services down. The answer to the tax dilemma is to have everyone, rich and poor, person and corporation, pay their fair share. And that will not happen until legislators who take money from wealthy special interests, legislators like my opponent, are replaced by legislators beholden only to the people."

This is a race worth getting involved in. It isn't enough just to beat the Republicans. It is almost as important to make certain independent-minded Democrats are elected who will stand up to corporate-oriented Democratic power-mongers like Rahm Emanuel and Steny Hoyer. Steven Porter will be that kind of a Democrat in Congress, someone who will stand up for traditional Democratic values and for the little guy-- against the DeLays and Bushes and Cheneys and against the Emanuels and Liebermans as well. If we want a better country, it's not only about partisan victories; it's about electing the right kind of Democrats-- like Steven Porter.


MONDAY NIGHT UPDATE: A CHANCE TO ACT BLUE

DWT has just added an ACT BLUE Page for Steven Porter. So if you'd like to see Congressman Gluttony waving bye-bye in November, keep in mind that even $10 or $20 is a tremendous help when enough people get together to combat the influence of the rich and powerful.

SO IS LIEBERMAN A DEMOCRAT OR NOT? HE'S BEING CAGEY

Or coy. Lieberman has been asked at least 3 or 4 times whether or not he would commit to abiding by the results of the Connecticut Democratic primary-- as Ned lamont has pledged to-- and support the candidate that Connecticut Democratic voters choose. He flat out refuses.

This is a transcript from Connecticut Blog of Holy Joe's interview with Joe Lalli, a 17 year old not afraid to ask the high and mighty, self-styled methusalah, a tough question:

Joe Lalli: Ned Lamont has already stated that he would
support you if you won the Democratic nomination and
Zell Miller once stated that he would always be a
member of the Democratic party. Can you make similar
promises?

LIEBERMAN: I'll always be a member of the Democratic
party. I hope there's not a primary. I'm confident if
there is one, I'll win it, but I'm not gonna rule out
any other option for now because I feel so strongly
that I can do better for the State of Connecticut for
the next six years in the United States Senate that I
want to give all the voters a chance to make that
decision on Election day in November. I want to do it
as a Democrat. If I didn't want to do it as a
Democrat, I would choose to run in some other party,
trust me. But I want to do it as a Democrat because I
believe in the Democratic party, so really the choice
is up to my fellow Democrats...

Sounds like a threat to me. Is his pal Chuck Schumer listening?

Meanwhile, I'd like to urge progressives to consider if they'd like to spare a little change for Ned Lamont, the actual Democrat in this primary. It's time to retire George Bush's favorite Democrat. You can help Ned at the DWT ACT BLUE Page. And if you live in Connecticut and you're in a volunteerin' mood... please, be my guest.


MONDAY UPDATE: LIEBERMAN-- CONFUSED AND CONFUSING EVERYONE ELSE

And now even the mainstream media is picking up on Lieberman's duplicitousness when it comes to the Democratic Party. The old guard of the Party still doesn't want to recognize what is as clear as day" Lieberman is out for himself and hasn't honestly had anything to do with the Democratic Party-- or, more important, Democratic ideals and values-- since he graduated from Yale. They should let go of this traitorous Neanderthal and get behind Ned Lamont, a guy who stands for everything appealing about the Democratic Party.

WHY DID BUSH LEAK AND THEN TRY TO COVER-UP THE LEAK?

In yesterday's NEW YORK TIMES, David Stout had an interesting piece about how BushCo is trying to quell the furor over the leak case and Bush's pattern of blatant lies and deception. Of course, the Bush Regime is lamely claiming that "the president had the authority to declassify and release information 'in the public interest' and had never done so for political reasons." Bush's chief flack, now widely thought of by the Washington press corps as just a useless liar himself, Scotty McClellan "was in the somewhat odd position of not disputing that President Bush was involved in the disclosure of hitherto classified information, while describing any such disclosure as being in the public good. Mr. McClellan, who noted that a president has the authority to declassify intelligence, said today that he was 'not getting into confirming or denying things, because I'm not commenting at all on matters relating to an ongoing legal proceeding.'"

But while the Bush Regime and the fourth estate were doing their pointless minuet, the country was boiling over with anger towards what is becoming commonly known as "the Leaker-in-Chief." And the Outside-the-Beltway Knight Ridder newspapers ran a story about exactly what McClellan and Bush and Rove and the whole Regime is frantic for no one to put together: how the White House very much does use intelligence leaks for partisan political gain and that there is a clear and quite despicable pattern to this.

The revelation that President Bush authorized former White House aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby to divulge classified information about Iraq fits a pattern of selective leaks of secret intelligence to further the administration's political agenda.
Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney and other top officials have reacted angrily at unauthorized leaks, such as the exposure of a domestic wiretapping program and a network of secret CIA prisons, both of which are now the subject of far-reaching investigations.
But secret information that supports their policies, particularly about the Iraq war, has surfaced everywhere from the U.N. Security Council to major newspapers and magazines. Much of the information that the administration leaked or declassified, however, has proved to be incomplete, exaggerated, incorrect or fabricated.
Court papers filed late Wednesday by Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald quote Libby as telling a grand jury that Bush, via Cheney, authorized him to reveal the key judgments of a National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction to New York Times reporter Judith Miller. The president and vice president have virtually unlimited legal authority to declassify government secrets.
The authorized leak, in July 2003, came two days after former Ambassador Joseph Wilson wrote an article in The New York Times charging that the White House had manipulated intelligence on Iraq's alleged quest for uranium ore from Africa to make its case for war.

Is there even one senator who deserves to be re-elected who does not sign on to Russ Feingold's censure resolution? Democrats, independents and honest Republicans need to let their senators know that we're sick and tired of Bush's unchecked lies and unconstitutional activities. And in this, Chuck Schumer and Dianne Feinstein are no cleaner than John Cornyn or Sam Brownback. Please consider showing Senator Feingold some support here.


SUNDAY UPDATE: GOP TOADY WANTS BUSH TO TELL THE DAMN TRUTH ALREADY

Even a complete toady and rubber-stamp Republican like Arlen Specter is demanding calling on Bush to come clean on the leaks. "I think that it is necessary for the president and the vice president to tell the American people exactly what happened," Specter said on Fox "News" today. "I'm not about to condemn or criticize anybody, but I do say that there's been enough of a showing here with what's been filed of record in. The president may be entirely in the clear, and it may turn out that he had the authority to make the disclosures which were made, but that it was not the right way to go about it, because we ought not to have leaks in government. We ought not to have them."

Ambassador Wilson, the intended victim of the Bush/Cheney illegal leaks, was a little more to the point than the old windbag from Pensylvania. On ABC's "This Week," he stated flatly that the Regime's leaking was part of a "disinformation campaign... Indeed, it seems to me it is long past time for the White House to come clean on all of this."

BUSH'S FAVORITE DEMOCRAT, JOE LIEBERMAN, MUM ON LEAKER-IN-CHIEF

There was a time when George W. Bush's favorite Democrat, Holy Joe Lieberman, tried to pass himself off as "the conscience of the Senate." That act didn't last very long-- at least not in anyone's mind but his own. Always someone to jump on the Know-Nothing bandwagon of narrow-minded demagoguery, the pious-on-the-outside/sleazy-on-the-inside senator from Connecticut, was the first Democrat to condemn President Clinton when he was fighting off partisan impeachment charges for consensual adult sex and, of course, every Democrat is aware of how Holy Joe has tried to pull the rug out from under his own party week after week, month after month, year after year on Fox "News" and the other Republican propaganda outlets that love using him.

Last December Lieberman completely split with the Democratic Party over Iraq. "Mr. Lieberman," according to The New York Times, "particularly infuriated his colleagues when he pointed out at a conference here that President Bush would be commander in chief for three more years and said that 'it's time for Democrats who distrust President Bush to acknowledge that... We undermine the president's credibility at our nation's peril.'"

Paragon of virtue? No, he is-- and always has been a complete and utter pawn of the wealthy corporate interests which underpin the Bush Regime, a regime to which he is wholeheartedly devoted. Today's HARTFORD COURANT reports that Bush's favorite Democrat was conspicuously silent and very much M.I.A.-- odd for a senator who will normally elbow anyone and everyone aside to get his mug in front of the TV cameras at the drop of a dime-- after BushCo virtually admitted that Bush himself was the OJ Simpson of the leak case the nation has been trying to get to the bottom of.

"News of President Bush authorizing leaks of intelligence reports to discredit critics of the Iraq war broke before noon Thursday," explains The Courant. "Democrats quickly lined up to demand a public accounting. Conspicuous in his silence was Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman, D-Conn., the politician analysts say could have benefited most by speaking out. Analysts and operatives in both parties said Friday they were puzzled that Lieberman, whose perceived coziness with the Republican president is fueling a primary challenge by Greenwich businessman Ned Lamont, found nothing to say about Bush for 28 hours. 'Say anything. Even something mildly critical would have no doubt helped in his primary,' said Larry Sabato, a University of Virginia political scientist.

Even in the reddest states the perception of Bush as an untrustworthy liar-- if not a traitor who must be impeached-- is becoming more and more prevalent. The Houston Chronicle prominently ran a story called "Critics Label Bush Hypocrite For Authorizing Leak" and the Louisville Courier Journal was even more blunt with its coverage: "The Leaker In Chief".

While other Capitol Hill media whores, like Chuck Schumer, tripped over themselves to get to the TV cameras to demand Bush disclose all the facts about his participation in the cover-up involving Scooter Libby, Ambassador Joe Wilson and outed CIA-agent Valerie Plame, Lieberman was apparently hiding under his bed and refusing to come out. "Come out Joey," coaxed Hadassah, "your friends from Fox TV are here with the cameras and your favorite make-up lady. And you haven't returned calls from that nice Sean Hannity or that lovely young Bill O'Reilly fellow."

But with an appointment-- possibly as replacement for Rumsfeld-- if he either loses the primary or resigns after he wins in November (allowing Republican Governor Jodi Rell to appoint a replacement) hanging in the balance, the crafty old Holy Joe is keeping silent on this one. The folks over at The Lamont Blog aren't.

(Thanks to Morse over at Media Needle for sending us the fine artwork, Adam being passed out drunk and unable to function for a few days.)


11:00AM UPDATE: IT'S THE END OF THE WORLD AS WE KNOW IT?

Of course some people think Lieberman was just too busy consulting with Team Bush on starting a nuclear war in Iran. If you didn't read Seymour Hersh's earth-shattering piece in the new NEW YORKER you really should. It's not really that much of a Lieberman story-- or even a Rovian wags the dog story-- as it as an Apocalypse Soon story.

PA-07: A TALE OF TWO DAUGHTERS AND WHY CURT WELDON SHOULD BE DRIVEN OUT OF CONGRESS ON A RAIL

If you read the DWT endorsement of Joe Sestak last week, you probably saw some of the reasons why I'm no fan of PA-07's whacked-out entrenched incumbent, the Moonie-lovin' Curt Weldon. At the time we decided on the endorsement, we also decided not to attack his 29 year old daughter Karen, even though we have read she is a corrupt Republican stooge/lobbyist and a bag-lady for her corrupt father. We just felt it wasn't kosher to attack Weldon's family and that his own misdeeds and abysmal record would help elect Admiral Sestak without dragging his pathetic family through the slime. So what changed?

In looking for a way to slow down the surging Sestak, Weldon made the political miscalculation of his entire miserable career. He snidely attacked Sestak and his family over the medical treatment they had chosen for their 5 year old daughter. Reaction in the district: revulsion at Weldon's crass, callus, partisan viciousness. If you want to know what kind of a degenerate Sestak is running against, please read the story in The Hill and remember back about why the whole nation was revolted by right-wing interference in the medical decisions DeLay, Bush, Frist, Santorum and other extremists tried making for Terri Schiavo.

So what about Weldon and his daughter the bribe-collecting bag-lady lobbyist? The L.A. Times had quite a bit to say about that today. Is it as bad as Republicrook John Doolittle using his moll to rake in the bribes and take a percentage for him? Absolutely; same Tom DeLay-inspired Republicrookery. It isn't just about questionable ethics. It's the kind of behavior that should land Weldon and his daughter in prison.

When Karen Weldon started getting some mighty high-flying foreign clients, she had exactly zero experience as a lobbyist. But she had a powerful, avaricious, glutonous and greed-obsessed daddy. (He wolfs down enough food for 3 or 4 normal people and is almost as fat as Dennis Hastert and Jim Sensenbrenner-- and don't think maintaining a figure like his costs pennies!) "Yet," says the L.A. Times, "her tiny firm was selected last year for a plum $240,000 contract to promote the good works of a wealthy Serbian family that had been linked to accused war criminal Slobodan Milosevic. "Despite a lack of professional credentials, she had one notable asset— her father, U.S. Rep. Curt Weldon (R-Pa.), who is a leading voice in Washington on former Eastern Bloc affairs. She got the contract after he championed the efforts of two family members, Dragomir and Bogoljub Karic, to win U.S. visas from the State Department, which so far has refused them entry. Intelligence officials warned Weldon that the brothers were too close to Milosevic, who is accused of leading the "ethnic cleansing" in the former Yugoslav federation."

That this is a criminal family-- criminal in terms of war crimes and in terms of Mafia tactics-- doesn't stop Weldon any more than a little bit of mud in the farm yard keeps a hog away from the feeding trough. He's salivating over the Karics vast empire of banking and telecommunications and he keeps hassling the State Department to let them into the U.S. And it hasn't stopped with the Serbs. Weldon has also been trying to get special consideration for two shady Russian clients of his daughter's-- clients who have put nearly a million dollars into the Weldon family budget this year.

"The Weldons," points out the L.A. Times, "are the latest example of special interests hiring relatives of important members of Congress as lobbyists and consultants. Over the last year, The Times has identified 11 other House members and 17 senators with relatives who lobby or consult, many of them for clients the members have helped through legislative or other action."

This fat slob of a congressman has rubber-stamped every slimy and catastrophic Bush/DeLay proposal while he feathered his own nest and increased his own girth. Plenty of time to criticize Admiral Sestak's medical choices for his 5 year old critically-ill daughter. But when it comes to making health care decisions for the citzens of Delaware County, Weldon is just another selfish, corporate greedball, selling out his constituents' interests again and again and again. The issue isn't about what hospital the Sestaks have chosen to save their daughter's life. It is why countless people in southeast Pennsylvania have no health care at all because of Curt Weldon's disgraceful rubber-stamp voting record.


MONDAY NIGHT UPDATE: A CHANCE TO ACT BLUE

DWT has just added an ACT BLUE Page for Joe Sestak. So if you'd like to see Curt Weldon and his lobbyist daughter waving bye-bye in November, keep in mind that even $10 or $20 is a tremendous help when enough people get together to combat the influence of the rich, powerful and corrupt.


THURSDAY UPDATE: THE CURT WELDON STORY GETS WORSE AND WORSE

Right in top of revelations that Weldon had his snout in Pete Sessions' Promia trough, HARPER'S has published an investigative piece called "The Curt Weldon Employment Agency," that clearly marks Weldon as someone calling out for federal investigators to stop him before he commits more crimes in his official capacity on the House Armed Services Committee.


MAY 9 UPDATE: HIDE EVERYTHING-- WELDON IS COMIN' THIS WAY AND HE'S HUNGRY

Billmon has also taken a look at a hungry, gluttonous soon to be ex-congressman. I think you'll like what he saw.

MEAN JEAN SCHMIDT-- CAUGHT RED-HANDED PADDING HER RESUME

Jesus, I could have done without writing yet another Mean Jean Schmidt blog post. But the Art Department has been insisting this is the story everyone wants to hear about. I don't get this. The Art Department is in West Palm Beach, Florida. They have a genuine psychotic running for the U.S. Senate (whose campaign continues to disintigrate before our eyes) and a whole pacel of nutcases and loons up for re-election to Congress (not to mention a governor who can't stop eating). But they seem fascinated by the only confirmed crack-whore on Capitol Hill, the unfortunate Mean Jean Schmidt.

OK, a couple days ago the CLEVELAND PLAIN DEALER exposed Mean Jean as a liar (again). Schmidt, who neither confirms nor denies KGO Radio's assertions that she is a crack whore, has claimed, for no apparent reason other than psychosis (possibly brought on by extended crack use), that she earned two degrees from the University of Cincinnati. She didn't and to former Republican Congressman Bob McEwen, who is challenging Schmidt in the May 2 GOP primary based on her fitness to hold public office-- or, rather, her lack of it-- this is just another in a long list of irrational nonsense Schmidt is always spewing. (Remember when she claimed to be getting marriage proposals from Republican congressmen after she called decorated war hero Jack Murtha a coward? They all turned out to be from gay Republicans like Mark Foley and David Dreier looking for a beard.) Anyway, her campaign claims that even if she didn't actually get the degree, she should have because she attended classes... or something. Oh. Can you imagine telling that to a personnel director questioning your job resume?

McEwen also is complaining that the delusional Schmidt is insisting that Ohio Congressman Steve Chabot and Colorado KKK leader Tom Tancredo have both endorsed her. Both vehemently deny it. Picky, picky.

And Republican voters in Ohio's 2nd congressional district seem eager to return her to Congress.


SUNDAY UPDATE: PRIMARY RACE TIGHTENS UP

According to the new Zogby poll, McEwen is catching up to Mean Jean. Only 2% separates them-- less than the poll's margin of error. At the same time, several news outlets in the district have reported that the Ohio Elections Commission has found probable cause that Schmidt may have violated state election law for claiming two degrees in campaign literature.

THE FIX IS IN DOWN IN TOM DELAY'S TEXAS DISTRICT

As you probably know, DWT has a team member deep in the heart of Texas, right in DeLay's Sugarland lair. Today Rozius fills us in on the latest shenanigans in Tom Delay's foul little world.


Anyone who was under the impression that the announcement of Tom Delay's upcoming resignation signaled the end of political corruption in Texas' Congressional District 22 should now see how misguided their hopes really were.

According to Texas law an election to replace a dead, convicted or resigned member of Congress must take place on one of the 2 remaining uniform election days, May 13 or November 7. The law further states that such elections require the ballot to be set up 36 days before election day.

That means that Tom Delay must resign today (April 7, 2006) in order for a special election to be held on May 13.

That isn't going to happen. Delay is purposely holding off resigning until after the deadline has passed in order to allow him time to hand pick his own successor setting up a November showdown with Democrat Nick Lampson who, according to the polls, would win the election if it were held today.

Of course, Rick "Governor Goodhair" Perry could call a special election at any time to see to it that the people of the 22nd Congressional District do not go unrepresented until next January. But, since Perry is one of Delay's and Dubya's favorite cabana boys that is very unlikely.

Meanwhile, the Delay mob continues "business as usual."

On Wednesday, Democrat Lampson called a press conference on the steps of the Sugarland, Texas Courthouse in order to ask Governor Perry to see to it that the citizens of the 22nd District got a timely chance to elect a Congressman more interested in their hopes and dreams than in furthering the right wing agenda of the Bush Crime Family.

Lampson began his press conference with a small crowd of 40 supporters  in attendance. As he answered questions from the local press a crowd of GOP supporters, summoned by Delay's campaign manager via e-mail, swooped in and began to disrupt the meeting.

In a scene right out of the Florida recount these GOP thugs showed their "conservative compassion' by drowning out Mr. Lampson's statement and by roughing up a 70 year old woman. (Video clip here.)

The Sugarland police stood by and did nothing.

When asked why they were there the Delay Brownshirts responded:
"I think what you're going to see is Republicans will rally behind a candidate and help get word out that Nick Lampson was one of the worst liberals the Texas delegation has ever seen."

"We just didn't like him coming in to Sugar Land. He surely should have known he was going to get some opposition."

"Nick is Nancy Pelosi's liberal lapdog from Beaumont, and he should get used to being confronted for the next seven months,"

The Lampson campaign responded:
"Rick Perry dances to the tune of Tom DeLay's drum. Their partisan politics are more important than the people of this district having a voice."

So there you have it. The more things change the more they remain the same.

I'll keep you posted as this campaign develops.
-Rozius, April 7, 2006

WILL FEINGOLD'S MODERATE CENSURE RESOLUTION BE REVIVED NOW THAT EVEN THE DIMMEST BULBS KNOW BUSH IS A CRIMINAL?

As Bush's and the Republican rubber-stamp Congress' approval ratings continue circling the toilet bowl, news for the renegade Regime gets worse and worse... and worse.

Even before the mass media picked up on Jane Harman's characterization of Bush as "the Leaker-in-Chief," A.P. was reporting that "Bush's approval ratings hit a series of new lows in an AP-Ipsos poll that also shows Republicans surrendering their advantage on national security-- grim election-year news for a party struggling to stay in power. Democratic leaders predicted they will seize control of one or both chambers of Congress in November. Republicans said they feared the worst unless the political landscape quickly changes. There is more at stake than the careers of GOP lawmakers. A Democratic-led Congress could bury the last vestiges of Bush's legislative agenda and subject the administration to high-profile investigations of the Iraq war, the CIA leak case, warrantless eavesdropping and other matters."

Bush's overall approval rating has sunk to 36%, his lowest ever in the AP-Ipsos poll and only 35% approve the way he's handling Iraq (another low). The rubber-stamp Congress does even worse, with only 30% approving. And by a whopping 49-33 margin, voters think Democrats, not Republicans should be in control of Congress. That 16% margin is the biggest either party has ever had in the history of AP-Ipsos polling.

After this dismal polling date had been gathered... "the Libby bombshell. Irving Libby (also know by several aliases: Scooter, Lewis and Louie) told the grand jury-- under oath-- that he divulged the top secret National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq to a New York Times reporter with specific permission from Bush.

Remember when Bush blurted out to the press "If someone committed crime, they will no longer work in my administration?" USA Today carried that on July 18, 2005. And Bush made a series of similar assertions, apparently trying to throw investigators and public off the trail of his vengeful, criminal Regime. Democratic Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid has demanded that Bush "come clean about his involvement... President Bush must fully disclose his participation in the selective leaking of classified information." Reid's office sited several instances of Bush's outright lies about the leak investigation and his knowledge of and participation in the leak of an active duty CIA agent (Valerie Plame) to get even with her husband, Ambassador Joe Wilson for telling the truth about Bush Regime lies regarding faked reports of Iraq trying to buy uranium from Niger.

Examples of Bush's public lies include two whoppers on September 30, 2003: "I don't know of anybody in my administration who leaked classified information. If somebody did leak classified information, I'd like to know it, and we'll take the appropriate action." The very same day, he was at it again, deceptively, brazenly and without any semblance of shame: "If there is a leak out of my administration, I want to know who it is. And if the person has violated law, the person will be taken care of. . . . I have told our administration, people in my administration to be fully cooperative. I want to know the truth. If anybody has got any information inside our administration or outside our administration, it would be helpful if they came forward with the information so we can find out whether or not these allegations are true and get on about the business." What a scumbag! It was him all along. And he was stil