EMILY's List Up It Its Old Tricks Again... Trying To Slip In A Corrupt Conservative Over A Progressive Because They Like The Plumbing's Better

Except when it's bad women candidates like Michele Bachmann, Colleen Hanbusa or Katherine Clark 

I got into a friendly Twitter argument the other day with a guy who works for the Victory Fund, an LGBT PAC. He was cheering slimy New Dem Sean Patrick Maloney, who is the Democratic freshman with the worst-- i.e, most conservative-- voting record this year. He's corrupt and unworthy of being reelected, despite the fact that he's gay and married with two adorable children. His lovely family does not excuse his excruciating bad votes. (Watch this video, please.) But the Victory Fund guy and I just could not see eye to eye on this. Finally I said something like, "we both support Carl Sciortino for Congress. I back him because he has a record as the most progressive and effective member of the Massachusetts state legislature. Why do you?" I don't want to put words in his mouth; here's the exact tweet exchange:

Blue America also endorsed Heather Mizeur for governor of Maryland. It's cool that she's a woman and it's cool that she's an up front lesbian, but that certainly is NOT why we think she will make as good a governor as Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren are senators. No, Mizeur is dynamite on policy and big on ideas and that's what attracted us to her. Maybe Victory Fund will back her because she's a lesbian and maybe EMILY's List will back her because she's a pro-Choice woman-- I hope so-- but Blue America backs her because she's the best candidate running.

Last year the Victory Fund endorsed a conservative Republican-- albeit a mainstream one, not a teabagger-- for Congress, Richard Tisei, over John Tierney, one of the most progressive Members of Congress AND a guy with a career-long 100% voting record on LGBT issues (unlike Tisei who was a typical Republican dick to the LGBT community when he was still a closet case). Ugghh. Maybe that's the only time the Victory Club ever made that kind of mistake, I hope so. EMILY's List, however, turned away from the progressive coalition long ago and seems to take particular delight in screwing up progressive male candidates-- especially ones with impeccable pro-Choice records-- on behalf of corrupt, untrustworthy women candidates (untrustworthy even on Choice), like when they backed the horrific anti-Semite Nikki Tinker in Memphis against Rep. Steve Cohen and the way they're pushing for corrupt warmonger Colleen Hanabusa now against Senator Brian Schatz in Hawai'i.

A friend of mine in Massachusetts sent me a post from Blue Mass about EMILY's List latest nightmare candidate, Katherine Clark, who they're running against the aforementioned Carl Sciortino. Clark is trying to pass a bill that would allow the cops to wiretap virtually anyone for anything, anytime, anywhere. She's the lead sponsor of a bill she claims would "just update" the organized crime wiretap bill on the books. The ACLU doesn't agree that she's trying to update it and they're horrified by Clark's Big Brother position that advances in communications technology,” necessitates it. The ACLU has said otherwise: “It’s not an ‘update.’ It’s a broad expansion of the wiretap law," asserts the ACLU, "to allow law enforcement to listen in to private conversations for virtually any investigative purpose.’” The ACLU is working with the Bill of Rights Defense Committee, Demand Progress, Digital Fourth, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, and Fight for the Future to stop Clark.

While Carl was fighting in the legislator to preserve benefits for ordinary working families, EMILY's List managed to find the lead sponsor of the very Republicanesque pension "reform" bill that was premised on cutting employee benefits and drastically raising the retirement age. That's why a coalition of over 20 Massachusetts unions including the AFL-CIO, the Massachusetts Teachers Association and AFSCME, opposed Clark's unfair conservative anti-worker approach. This is all typical of a ConservaDem who fights for corporate special interests and against ordinary working families. There are enough of them in Congress already-- way too many. Clark's vote for putting punitive restrictions against poor people in the welfare bill tells you all you need to know about her: she's a Republican at heart, masquerading as a Democrat in a blue state. Did you watch that video I suggested up near the top?