Wednesday, March 10, 2010

DCCC Fails The Impartiality Test... Again

>


The good news yesterday was that the DCCC added Donna Edwards (D-MD) as a vice chair of their Red to Blue program, which, in the past, has been badly flawed. The less good news is that Debbie Wasserman Schultz, who once ran the Red to Blue program herself and is now the real power at the DCCC, has decreed that all serious resources are going to protect Front Line incumbents, primarily a bunch of conservative aisle crossers who are barely Democrats.

Although they have promised to stop the anti-grassroots practice of taking sides in contested primaries, the Wasserman Schultz has forced the reluctant professional staff to keep doing it. She was behind the decision to endorse a lobbyist-backed ultra-conservative, Lori Edwards. with not a glimmer of a chance to win in November, for the seat being vacated by Adam Putnam (FL-12). Edwards is being sponsored by the Blue Dog caucus and Patrick Murphy, the Blue Dog who heads the Red to Blue program this year, jumped into the race early at the behest of Wasserman Schultz and Lori Edwards' main backer, Allen Boyd, the right-wing Democrat who was the only member of his party to back Bush's legislation to kill Social Security and who is facing likely defeat in his own primary this year.

Today the DCCC announced their first round of Red to Blue candidates. These are the challengers who Democratic members are encouraged-- some would say strong-armed-- to donate to. As we saw last month, Blue Dogs always give to conservatives likely to vote with the Blue Dog caucus (and the GOP) against progressive legislation. Progressives, inexplicably, seem to go along for the ride!

When I complained to the DCCC that they had endorsed a Blue Dog with no local backing from Democratic activists over a grassroots progressive who did well against Putnam when he ran in 2008, I was told, ingenuously, that Edwards had raised lots of money and that Tudor hadn't. Turns out all that Edwards money-raising prowess was actual contributions from the Blue Dog caucus and by individual Blue Dog shitheads with a vested interest in electing new anti-progressive members of the caucus. Oh, and then there was the lobbyist funder that Wasserman Schultz and Boyd put on for Lori Edwards in DC. But Wasserman Schultz has always hated straight-talking ordinary Americans who didn't play the Inside the Beltway game that is so despised throughout the country.

Who else did the DCCC add to their Red to Blue program besides the wretched Blue Dog? The twelve others, with a couple of exceptions, don't inspire a great deal of enthusiasm-- unless you get enthusiastic about someone wearing the blue jersey instead of the red jersey. Here's the whole list:
Ami Bera (CA-3)
Paula Brooks (OH-12)
John Callahan (PA-15)
John Carney (DE-AL)
Suzan DelBene (WA-08)
Raj Goyle (KS-04)
Roy Herron (TN-08)
Bryan Lentz (PA-07)
Rob Miller (SC-02)
Steve Pougnet (CA-45)
Dan Seals (IL-10)
Tom White (NE-02)
Lori Edwards (FL-12), oddly the only one out of alphabetical order on the list the DCCC sent out to the media.

How many outstanding progressives are on this list? Well... I hear from a mutual friend that Bethlehem Mayor John Callahan is great but I've never been able to get him on the phone. Everyone I know in Kansas tells me wonderful stuff about Raj Goyle and he definitely has a good record in the Kansas House of Representatives, having taken very aggressive stands against lobbyists and against hatemonger Fred Phelps. Dan Seals seems ok and at least he won his primary. And I'm hearing all really good stuff about Ami Bera, the only Democrat opposing homophobic fanatic Dan Lungren.

On the other hand, Nebraska state Sen Tom White is a conservative, who, in the very unlikely event that he wins against incumbent Lee Terry, will be voting with the GOP just the way his pal Ben Nelson does. Steve Pougnet, the proudly gay mayor of Palm Springs, wouldn't rule out joining the Blue Dog caucus when I spoke with him on the phone-- even after I told him that every single Democrat who voted against including the LGBT community is the hate crimes bill were a pack of homophobic Blue Dogs. Democratic activists in Delaware tell me John Carney is OK, but kind of conservative and a bit of a Tom Carper clone. His opponent is Democrat Scott Spencer who, understandably, is very pissed off about the DCCC interference in his state's race. This is what he told us a few minutes ago:
"As a lifelong Democrat, I am disappointed that the DCCC used a flawed endorsement process in the Delaware Democratic primary. The fact that the DCCC refused most of my phone calls, refused to meet with me in Washington, and failed to consider my capabilities to offer Delaware and the Democratic Party representation-innovation, calls into question the integrity of the DCCC endorsement process nationwide. As we speed towards the election challenges of November, fixing the DCCC to find the candidates who are best able to serve the people with real results, right now, is essential to prevent a Democratic U.S. House trainwreck. Those candidates who can convert President Obama's Audacity of Hope vision into the Audacity of Action to create jobs, will prevail in November."

Labels: ,

3 Comments:

At 7:08 PM, Blogger jim jackson said...

Those of us in Central Florida will still support Dough Tudor despite the DCCC.
Two years ago Debbie did not support the 3 South Floridian Dems with real chances to oust the 3 Cuban American right wingers by dropping a money bomb. What goes?

 
At 10:49 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Wasserman-Schultz is hurting the Democratic Party. Her political instincts are questionable because she doesn't seem to realize that any moron who puts a "D" next to their name but votes against our Democratic President is hurting the party in the long run. Support and vote for Doug Tudor, not because of his party, not because of his '08 race against Adam putnam, but because he has shown as a Naval retiree what it really means to serve his country and that he understands best the people who need his represntation the most.

 
At 5:25 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Wasserman-Schultz knows exactly what she is doing. Accumulating power and future (present?) wealth. Like Rahm Emanuel, Harold Ford, etc. she sees that Democrats can get ahead by servicing powerful corporate interests more effectively than Republicans, and that those Democrats with the most powerful financial allies will be "promoted" faster than true progressives who are less willing to play ball.

She's quite smart and even more ruthless. I've kept an eye on her for the past few years after hearing a story about her cold-shouldering a potential Democratic challenger to a Republican congressman in Florida (forget which one).

 

Post a Comment

<< Home