Don't Expect To See Clay Aiken Run For Congress Again

The Esquire Network just finished running the 4-hour documentary on American Idol runner-up Clay Aiken's congressional run against Republican Renee Ellmers in a very gerrymandered North Carolina district. The documentary was cut up into episodes and shown as a series. It wasn't very good... but I kept watching anyway. There's a piece of one of the last episodes above. Clay had come to understand-- just after winning the primary 11,649 (40.8%) to 11,277 (37.5%) and just before losing to Ellmers 121,336 (58.9%) to 84,826 (41.1%)-- what many idealistic Democratic candidates eventually come to understand, namely that the DCCC is no one's friend.

Debbie Wasserman Schultz's time as head of the DCCC's Red-to-Blue program is probably best remembered for her dogged support for three Republican allies in South Florida, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen and the Diaz-Balart brothers, against the three Democratic candidates. But there was another typical Wasserman-Schultz muck-up that should be remembered when she makes her big play for whatever her next move up the ladder is-- the grotesque, elitist disrespect she showed towards a retired, decorated naval officer when he asked for her help in his race against Republican climber Adam Putnam. This is from the note that candidate, Doug Tudor, a dedicated Democratic Party progressive activist, sent DWT back in 2008 right after the incident:

I, of course, was most anxious to meet and speak with Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman-Schultz (DINO-FL), who is chairing the DCCC’s Red-to-Blue program. I just knew that she would welcome the chance to defeat Adam Putnam, as that would allow her lay sole claim to the title of “Wonder Kid” in Florida’s politics. Adam, after all, isn’t her next door neighbor. Once she comes onboard, I assumed, the other members of the caucus would lose their timidity and also support me. I was dead wrong, and I should have known better.

It is well known that Wasserman-Schultz supports Republicans Lincoln Diaz-Balart, Mario Diaz-Balart, and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen over their Democratic opponents, although lately she has been pressured into giving belated and grudging support to Joe Garcia and Raul Martinez who are opposing the Diaz-Balarts. I always figured that she was just afraid of the Hispanic backlash in her own district. What I hadn’t considered is that she is just afraid of all incumbent Republicans in Florida. When I met her in Denver, she immediately told me that she couldn’t support me, saying I hadn’t raised enough money. I told her that I had raised $100K, that I was a military retiree, that my family is living on my wife’s Air Force E6 pay, and that I wasn’t able like other “viable” candidates to drop a quarter of a million dollars into my own campaign. I then told her, “Congresswoman, I am one of those working-class guys that our party claims to represent.” Her response was “Don’t pull that populist stuff with me.” I thanked her for her time.

As a person who made his career in the profession of arms, I know that when you’re in a fight, you have to fight on all fronts. Adam Putnam is easily becoming the most-hated Republican in America. He can be beat. Even Adam knows it’s a bad year for Republicans. Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman-Schultz needs to lead, follow, or get the Hell out of the way.

I didn't dredge this up merely as a contrast between Wasserman-Schultz and the way another candidate not backed by the DCCC-- Nate Shinagawa-- talked about the most recent Red-to-Blue chair, Donna Edwards (although it is certainly worth reading from that perspective). No, this was meant as an introduction to the Washington Post op-ed by a Democratic congressional candidate, an op-ed the Post pulled at the last moment.

2014 could have been a big year for the candidate. Despite negative "help" from DCCC chairman Steve Israel in 2012, he came closer to unseating the right-wing Republican incumbent than any previous Democrat ever had. (Israel has a firm policy of protecting senior Republican leaders and committee chairs, no matter how vulnerable their districts and no matter how heinous their agendas, in return for his own immunity from NRCC challenge.) Our candidate actually beat the Republican in the eastern third of the district. The Republican incumbent's approval/disapproval rating was underwater-- 38-43%, with 46% of respondents saying they would vote for his Democratic opponent, only 44% saying they would stick with the Republican, numbers that got worse when voters were informed the incumbent voted to shut down the government-- and he announced he was retiring from Congress (for a lucrative lobbying job). A civil war between two ambitious GOP wingnuts ensued.

In the midst of all this, the district registration advantage flipped to the Democrats, who went from a 3.6% disadvantage to the Republicans to a slight voter registration edge of 0.5% (1,975 voters). The key, of course, was turning out these Democratic voters in a midterm election when minorities and young voters tend to skip their civic duty-- which is what they did. Less than 50,000 people voted in the jungle primary and most of the ones who did were Republicans. Democrats just stayed home. The Democratic candidate asked the DCCC for help-- to avoid the same kind of catastrophe that they had gone through a couple districts south (CA-31) in 2012, when their candidate, Pete Aguilar, didn't make it into the runoff despite an overwhelmingly Democratic advantage, D+5. But the DCCC, after acknowledging that this had to be done, forgot the Hispanic outreach and GOTV efforts they were promising. Nothing was done, and on primary night one Republican had 14,573 votes and the other Republican had 14,016 votes; the Democrat mustered only 11,107. (Another Democrat, physically better placed on the ballot, took 4,868 votes, which would have been enough to put the actual Democratic candidate over the top.)

Another progressive Democrat, this one in Pennsylvania, who ran against a powerful Republican incumbent in 2012, and who got exactly zero help from the DCCC, was Aryanna Strader (now Aryanna Hunter). I asked her to comment about her experience with the DCCC as a candidate while Israel was running the show. She didn't speak about Israel directly, but anyone who follows his crazy mystery-meat strategy will recognize what she was talking about. Clay Aiken certainly would. "When congressional candidates run their campaigns trying to appease Democrats in Washington instead of running a campaign they believe in, those candidates are essentially tying their hands behind their back and disconnecting themselves from any hope of winning. Democrats running for office need to stand up for their ideals, embrace who they are as individuals and use it to their advantage. And the Democrats in Washington need to recognize their value and support them in that individual way."

I spoke to another progressive candidate-- this one from the upper Midwest, who was also stiffed by the DCCC. She hasn't given up the fight, not by a long shot, but she thinks it will take a long time to reform the DCCC. "We built an incredible grassroots network," she told me soon after the election, "and it would be a real shame to let all that work go to waste when there's still so much to be done. That being said, I'm glad to see that there will be changes in leadership at the DCCC... though I'm skeptical much will really change in how they choose candidates. The organization is focused on finding the best fundraisers, not candidates. The dysfunction is systemic, and a new figurehead isn't likely to change that."

Now...back to Clay-- in his own words and those of his staffers. Like all the candidates, the DCCC was pestering Aiken to raise more money and hire more of their corrupt consultants. His campaign manager, who now works at the DSCC: "The DCCC puts you on certain lists and if you get on their lists you get validity and credibility... It helps with fundraising." His finance director emphasized that "they've asked us to reach certain fundraising benchmarks and we've reached those benchmarks." Aiken:

That's a big deal. They said, "If you raise $400,000 in the second quarter we'll come and help." We raised much more than that, but still, no movement from the DCCC. They were very actively involved in convincing me to run. They said that they wanted to be supportive. And when we started running, they started distancing themselves... All I want them to do is put us on their Red-to-Blue List, which is the list of races that they believe are viable.

Aiken joked that the attitude and the deceit of the DCCC had him thinking about jumping off a cliff. Do I get stories like this from every grassroots progressive Democrat seeking to run for Congress? Yeah, pretty much so. This cycle, for example, I don't see any interest whatsoever from the DCCC for some of the best candidates running-- Jason Ritchie (D-WA), Alex Law (D-NJ), Jamie Raskin (D-MD), and Nanette Barragán (D-CA). Many other seasoned candidates are refusing to run until Pelosi, or whoever replaces her, gets rid of Israel-- not with a sock puppet like Ben Ray Luján.

D-Liver D-Letter D-Sooner D-Better

Issa

H. Res 30 expresses the sense of the House that the U.S. Postal Service should take all appropriate measures to ensure the continuation of its 6-day delivery service. I was shocked that the principal sponsor of the resolution was Sam Graves, a very conservative congressman from Missouri. Rural Missouri. He was not toeing the Party line; he was paying attention to what his constituents want. H. Res 30 was immediately assigned to the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, chaired by the #1 enemy of the U.S. Post Office Darrell Issa, who is dedicated on destroying and then privatizing it. The House bill tracking system at govtrack.us gives it zero chance of ever getting out of Issa's committee:

There are 54 co-sponsors, a dozen of whom are Republicans. This would have to grow gigantically before forcing Issa to take any action at all. Most of the Republicans co-sponsoring represent rural districts where the postal service is crucial. When Carol Shea-Porter (D-NH) signed on as a new co-sponsor yesterday, she said "The US Postal Service is a vital resource for communities throughout our state and our country. Eliminating Saturday mail-delivery does not adequately address the issues facing the United States Postal Service. This is the wrong approach because the Postal Service will lose vital business and consumers will be hurt.”

Illinois state Senator Toi Hutchinson, who's running for the open congressional seat in the Southland second district understands why this is a salient issue. She's opposed to closing the post office on Saturdays and is letting voters in the district know it: "I represent rural areas that depend on the post office to be open and working six days a week. I don't agree with attempts to cut that short." Rep. Bruce Braley, the likely Democratic nominee for the open Iowa Senate seat, was one of the first House Members to sign on to Grave's resolution. Neither of his conservative Republican perspective opponents, Tom Latham or Steve King-- each incapable of acting on behalf of their constituents when their interests are at odds with right-wing dogma-- have not backed Grave's legislation. Matt Cartwright's northeast Pennsylvania district is a microcosm of America. It includes cities, suburbs, small towns and remote rural areas. He's another congressmember incensed over the decision to end Saturday delivery:

"The agency’s crisis is a direct result of an unsustainable congressional mandate imposed on the Postal Service by the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act (PAEA). The federal law forces the Postal Service to pre-fund healthcare benefits for future retirees and to do so in a 10-year period. No other entity-- public or private-- bears this burden. Since the PAEA took effect in 2007, the Postal Service has been required to pre-pay approximately $5.5 billion per year. Yet the same law prohibits the Postal Service from raising postage rates to cover the cost.

"The Postal Service has already slashed mail service by closing 13,000 post offices and drastically reducing hours of operation, shutting hundreds of mail processing facilities, and downgrading standards for mail delivery to America’s homes and businesses. The effects have already been felt locally in Scranton and today’s announcement will only place a greater burden on the 17th Congressional district.

The Postal Service has a mission that is bigger than making money. Our mail system is a vital part of the strength of our American infrastructure. In my view, we should not be allowing a culture of efficiency esxperts to downgrade pasrt of the pride of our great nation. Congress must take a holistic approach in passing comprehensive Postal Reform legislation addressing both the recent decline in mail volume as well as the strain placed on the Postal Service by the mandated PAEA."

Congress may force the post office to stop regular deliveries on Saturdays, but, as comedian Andy Borowitz suggested, it sure isn't going to force the Executive Branch to stop regular drone strikes on Saturdays... or any other days. Doug Tudor is not a comedian. He's a naval vet who ran for Congress in Florida a few years ago. Like many of us, he's concerned with what Issa and his right-wing allies are doing to the post office.

The Undermining Of The Postal Service Goes Beyond Darrell Issa
-by Doug Tudor

This week the United States Postal Service said they would cut Saturday delivery for first-class mail.  They did so because of their budget woes. It should be mentioned, though, the USPS never had any budget woes until Congress said they have to fund their retirement accounts for 75 years in the future. In other words, they never cost the taxpayer a single penny until Congress laid this 75-Year shitstorm on their head. Why would Congress do this? Campaign contributions, of course.

There is a tiny town in central Florida called Nalcrest. It only has a population of less than 500. The population, though, has a distinct hegemony. You see, Nalcrest, is an acronym for National Association of Letter Carriers-- Rest. In other words, NALCRest is a retirement community for the union members of the National Association of Letter Carriers.

From 2011 to 2013, Nalcrest’s representative in the U.S. House was Dennis Ross. Dennis Ross during the same time was the chairman of the subcommittee on the Federal Workforce and Postal Service Committee. In this role, his every action went against the United States Postal Service, even as he was taking thousands of dollars from USPS competitors FedEx and UPS.

NALCrest is now in a new congressional district represented by Congressman Tom Rooney. Unlike Ross due to his subcommittee chairmanship, Rooney does not have the power to single-handedly bankrupt a town of his own constituents, except that he is a solid Republican vote for any crazy ass, lobbyist-fueled vote against the USPS. Like Ross before him, Rooney receives thousands of dollars from UPS and FEDEX.

Wonder why American Democracy seems to be broken.

Me personally, paying less than 50 cents to have a letter taken from the mailbox at the end of my driveway and delivered less than two days later to an end-of-driveway mailbox in San Diego is as American as Apple Pie, “Please Mr. Postman,” and “Take a Letter, Maria.”

 

And, no, neither Ross nor Rooney-- nor any other Florida Republican congressmember-- is cosponsoring Graves' resolution. Florida Democrats Lois Frankel, Debbie Wasserman Schultz and Ted Deutsch are though.

Let's Hear From Two Florida Progressives-- Doug Tudor And Alan Grayson

Doug'n'Debbie

First Doug, a progressive, a Naval veteran and former congressional candidate twice stabbed in the back by the DCCC which made certain that his part of Florida would remain a Republican stronghold. This is the message he sent this morning:

Friends, I am writing this note because I just read DWT’s big money blog. Each and every voter should be sickened by the uber-rich dominance of our supposed democracy.

Please read this missive, as it will help to explain how DWT’s current post is important. It will also explain how supporting DWT and Blue America help to counter mega-frigging-money in our electoral politics.

DWT played a great role in 2008 in publicizing a meeting I had with Representative Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, then chair of the DCCC's Red-to-Blue program. After traveling to the Denver convention on supporter-contributed airline miles and hotel points, I nudged my way into the DCCC signature event.

By the way, I was the Democratic nominee in Florida's 12th Congressional District, running against the GOP's 3rd-ranking member, Representative Adam Putnam. As a recent military retiree … a USN Master Chief who had worked for four Commanders of U.S. Central Command ... banned from participating in party politics during my active duty ... I didn't have deep political connections (Hell, I didn't have cut-and-scratch political connections).

As I tried to introduce myself to DCCC Red to Blue Chairwoman DWS, she quickly informed me she wasn't going to be able to help me. I reminded her that some of her targeted races-- it was primary day in Florida-- had lost their races.

Surprised because she hadn’t heard of these primary results, DWS asked me how much money we had raised. I told her that we had just passed the $100K mark. She responded that "they"-- the DCCC, I assumed-- couldn't look at my race until I raised $250K.

When I reminded the DCCC Vice-Chairwoman, “Ma’am, I am one of those working-class folks our party claims to represent,” DWS responded, “Don’t pull that populist BS on me.” I thanked her and went on my way.

That interaction was one of my proudest political moments, and it was one of my dumbest. I relayed the story to Down With Tyranny, and I received a few thousand dollars of contributions. Due to Google alerts, DWS knew of my new fame with anti-DWS forces.

Here’s the rub. On election night 2008, newly elected Representative Adam Putnam resigned his leadership post in the GOP-- it was the second election where he was in the leadership while the GOP lost a great number of seats. Two months later, on Super Sunday 2009, he announced he would not run for reelection.

I, of course, ran again believing that my earlier race-- 42.5% of the vote, 135,000 votes (2nd best vote-getter of any challenger in Florida who didn’t win; after being outspent 18-1-- being the best money-to-vote in Florida) would elicit party support.

Due to my DWT-publicized discussion with now-DNC Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the party supported a former pol who hadn’t ran as a Democrat in 12 years. With buttloads of money, she beat me in the primary and eventually gained only 32% in a three-way race for an open seat. I have no doubt that if I had broader support from the $5 and $20 supporters, I would have won my primary, and I would now be a member of Congress.

Readers of “Down With Tyranny” can have friends in Congress. They can have friends in Congress by negating the uber-rich politicians by supporting citizen-candidates with monthly contributions.

Please do so now. Really! You can make a difference by contributing a small amount monthly. Please support Down With Tyranny and Blue America. We small-contributor candidates are looking for your input, and we’re counting on your support.

PART II: Congressman-elect Alan Grayson

Everyone's happy when their favorite candidate wins-- even if their favorite is just the lesser of two evils, a garden variety Democrat for example, who's probably better than a Republican but not much more. But when the winner is someone you really believe in, the way voters across Florida's 9th CD-- and across America-- believed in Alan Grayson... well, then it's time to break out the fireworks. Obama won FL-09 with 62.16% of the vote, a great result. Grayson won the district with a fractionally better result: 62.52%. Here's part of an e-mail Grayson sent his supporters yesterday. Something tells me Democratic leaders like Steve Israel, Steny Hoyer, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Joe Crowley and the rest of the gang plotting with the Republicans to sell out working families in the Lame Duck session, don't get responses like these. Grayson:

I have always said that we have the best supporters. After Election Day, you proved it. Literally thousands of supporters have reached out to us, to offer congratulations and best wishes. I wish that I could share with you what everyone said, but this is an e-mail, not a Vulcan mind-meld. So here are a beautiful few:

    CONGRATULATIONS REPRESENTATIVE GRAYSON!!!!!!!! "THE SPINE" OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY HAS RETURNED!!!! – Donnell

    This is some of the best news in the entire 2012 election -- Mr. Grayson, you're a man of grit, humor, intelligence and above all, integrity. - Betsy

    You are the only one telling truth to power. - Barry

    No one is always right. But you sure sock it to 'em. Stay well and safe. We need your voice. - John

    May you be one of the few who go to Washington, and continue speaking your mind (like that's ever going to stop). Remember the people who are counting on you. - Bonnie

    You have sensitivity, a stiff back, intelligence, guts and grit. You’re my kind of Congressman. - Bill

    You did more than kick ass ... you obliterated your opponent. Maybe you should check on him to see if he's OK .... - Tom

  I do not live in your district but you are my favorite Representative. I may have to move!! – Ron

  Congratulations on your win. That was the best $25 bucks I have ever spent. - Charlie

    I was walking on clouds today. I sincerely hope this is the start of your forty-year tenure in American politics!!! GO ALAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Dude, you're a god, what can I say? - George

    Great win for us, the working class! - Rick

    My heart skipped a beat when I saw your name in the "win" column last night. - Barbara

    Congratulations, Alan. I am so happy for you and us. I live in Oregon and contributed to your campaign, because we are all connected. - Georgia

    Much of the momentum that got so many Democrats elected this time around is due in a very large part to your tireless efforts. My prayers are with you tonight. So are my thanks. – Clay

    My hard work making phone calls and knocking on doors has paid off in your re-election to Congress. - Donald

    Congratulations Alan! You were the only congressman we could afford to spend our very limited funds supporting, but [we] truly believed the House needed you back! - Harriet & John

    I am an 88-year-old man living on retirement. I was not able to donate to many contests – I had to choose carefully. So I chose two with the meager funds I could spare. One was Alan Grayson. The other was Elizabeth Warren. The United States has won again, on both counts. - Russell

    I have lost everything and am on Social Security so I am not able to give as much as I could before, but I will watch your career and support you. My very best to you, and your future in Congress. Our country is so fortunate to again have you back as one of the crew members of the "Ship of State". - Kathy

    Even though, at age 87 and living on a widow's SS stipend, I was unable to contribute money to your campaign, I contacted everyone I knew in your district to tell them what an outstanding citizen they had running for Congress. I waited up much after President Obama's victory to see if you had won, and I think I woke up my nearest senior living apartment neighbors with my "Whoopees”! I am so proud that you are representing our state as one of the few in Congress who is fearless, intelligent and dedicated to doing what is necessary to take our nation properly into the 21st Century. The Creator has blessed us with you. – Emily 

Let me close this by tying the two statements, one from Doug and one from Alan, togther, with another quote from Alan, an important one when you consider the House Democratic Caucus leadership votes coming up this week: “Let’s not fall into the trap of thinking that one Democrat is as good as any other, that we’re all interchangeable parts. We’re not. Some of us have a head, and a heart, and a spine, and some of us don’t. Blue America concentrates on helping the Democrats who deserve our help, the Democrats who can make a difference. Blue America’s encyclopedic knowledge of every Congressional race means that they do your homework for you. When you support Blue America, you’re supporting the best of the best, in the most important races in the country. It sure made a difference in our election.”

An Important Race No One Outside Of Florida Is Talking About-- Guest Post By Doug Tudor

Doug Tudor was the Blue America-backed progressive running for the Democratic nomination in FL-12 (some of Hillsborough County and almost all of Polk). The DCCC saw to it that Blue Dog Lori Edwards won that race, although they have since abandoned her to her fate. Nate Silver figures the Republican in that race, Dennis Ross, has a 87.5% chance of winning tomorrow. Silver's latest prediction is that Ross will take 49.1% of the vote; Edwards will take 37.5% and the Tea Party candidate, Polk County Commissioner Randy Wilkinson, will only get 8.6%. Doug has been on the ground in Hillsborough and Polk counties, working for the Democratic ticket, including Edwards, and he thinks she's going to win. He thinks she's going to win because Wilkinson is going to do much better than outside pollsters, pundits and prognosticators figure. That will be an interesting one to watch, although not one I'll be rooting for one way or the other.

Doug is very excited about a race I hadn't been following, the campaign pitting Adam Putnam against former Tallahassee Mayor Scott Maddox for Commissioner of Agriculture and Consumer Services. It looks like Scott is running for Consumer Affairs Commissioner and Putnam is running for Agricultural Commissioner. Doug endorsed him, calling him "intelligent, innovative, and extremely ethical," not a ready combination in Florida politics on either side of the aisle.

While I truly believe in Scott's leadership qualities and credentials, there is another reason that we need to rally behind him. Scott is running neck-and-neck with our "old friend," Congressman Adam Putnam... The concept of a Governor Putnam is the scariest thing I can think of during this Halloween season.

Fortunately, we have a great candidate in Scott Maddox. Standing with Scott, we will continue to fight the special interests, right-wing insanity, and corporate cronyism that Adam Putnam is trying to bring back to our state's capitol.

...Scott has a common-sense approach to Florida agriculture; he believes that we need a strong partnership between the department and Florida's many diverse agricultural entities-- securing and growing a one billion dollar industry for the future.

Scott believes in the promotion of fuel crops-- reducing our dependency on foreign fossil fuels by promoting 'American Grown' fuel and investing in a multitude of green energies, specifically: tidal and solar sources. 

Throughout his career, Scott has always been a strong consumer advocate. He took an early stance against offshore oil drilling and believes the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services should take a leading role in combating the many types of fraud that are currently running rampant in Florida, especially against our seniors.

I called Doug and asked him if he's help put the importance of this race in context for us by explaining how Putnam plans to use it. He did:

President Putnam?

-by Doug Tudor

Down ballot races are often ignored by political pundits and voters. There’s just nothing sexy or exciting about a candidacy for a county Soil and Water Conservation Board, for instance. What we do know, though, is those candidates and office holders often go on to occupy higher office.

In Florida, there are four members of the state’s cabinet. Along with the Governor, Attorney General, and Chief Financial Officer, the cabinet includes the Commissioner of Agriculture and Consumer Services. Again, nothing sexy, right?

Actually, the Ag Commissioner is a very important post as it deals not only with farming issues, but with consumer and environmental issues. In a state prone to hurricanes, for instance, it is the Ag Commissioner who acts as responder-in-chief to oversee controls and combat fuel and insurance price-gouging and other disaster-related consumer frauds.

Now here is where this particular race gets interesting. In early 2009, Florida’s political landscape looked pretty well secure. Wildly popular Republican Governor Charlie Crist would run for reelection in 2010, as would Attorney General Bill McCollum, Chief Financial Officer Alex Sink, and U.S. Senator Mel Martinez. No one seriously considered any of the incumbents to face anything by token opposition.

Viewing the toxic landscape for Republicans in Washington, and after being forced from the House leadership-- okay, he resigned on election night before his fellow Republicans could force him out-- our old friend, Adam “Howdy Doody Looking Nimrod” Putnam, decided to return to Florida via the 2010 Ag Commissioner race.

After all, Opie could glide to victory, serve four years in a state-wide office, then run to replace Charlie Crist as Governor in 2014, once Crist was term-limited. From the Governor’s chair, he could view his future options of a U.S. Senate seat or even the Oval Office. Hell, when you’re 35 and stinking rich and you’ve already been in office for 13 years, the sky truly seems to be the limit.

Accordingly, the Boy from Bartow announced on Super Sunday 2009 that he would leave the U.S. House and seek the non-sexy office of Commissioner of Agriculture and Consumer Services. We constituents were thrilled to get this rabid rightwing demagogue out of Washington.

But something happened on the way to Putt Putt’s coronation. Senator Mel Martinez resigned from the U.S. Senate. Governor Charlie Crist appointed his Chief of Staff, George Lemieux, as senatorial seat warmer until Crist could win the seat himself this year. McCullom would run for Governor, as would Chief Financial Officer Alex Sink. Suddenly, all four of Florida’s cabinet seats were open, and a boring off-year election cycle had exciting potential.

This was only a minor hiccup for Putnam. In his eyes, this meant he would either have to face an incumbent Democratic governor in 2014 or ride the Ag post another four years until the incumbent Republican governor was term-limited in 2018. What the hell, he would still only be 44 when he cake-walks into the Governor’s mansion and in his early 50’s when he strolls back to Washington.

Okay, so back to the main point. Down-ballot races are extremely important. They allow the office holder to change the way a particular matter is handled. For instance, Adam has taken hundreds of thousands of campaign contributions from financial services ($616,373), but is set to be the consumer watchdog on banking and other financial matters. He has taken tens of thousands from Big Insurance ($230,275), but is set to be its chief regulator in the nation’s fourth most populous state. He has taken tens of thousands from Big Oil ($84,300), and was one of the “Band of Brothers” who was chanting “Drill, Baby, Drill” in August 2008. Even after the BP disaster this year, Putnam would not back down from his quest to bring drilling closer and closer to Florida’s shores.

In the long term, the real importance of a down-ballot office becomes even more apparent. These offices serve as spring boards for higher office.

Putnam’s ascendency to the Governor’s mansion, the U.S. Senate, and the White House has to run through the office of Commissioner of Agriculture and Consumer Services. It may not be sexy, but as Vice President Biden might say, “It’s a Big Fucking Deal.”

Blue Dogs vs Progressives-- Tomorrow Is Primary Day In Florida's 12th Congressional District

Gee (I thought) I wish I had a crystal ball to tell me how the primary in Florida's 12th CD would turn out tomorrow before I write this post. But I don't, so I'm going to plow ahead anyway. I'm not certain of this, but I believe tomorrow's election is the first time a Democratic primary for an open seat finds the Blue Dog caucus and the Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC) lined up formally backing different candidates. The Blue Dogs are backing Lori Edwards, a reactionary who gives every indication of being a habitual aisle crosser if she were ever to make it into Congress. John Boehner must have his fingers crossed that if Edwards wins the primary, he's guaranteed a vote for the conservative agenda regardless of what happens in November. The Congressional Progressive Caucus has endorsed, Doug Tudor, last cycle's Democratic challenger, a stalwart and intrepid defender of the legitimate aspirations of ordinary working American families. Edwards' legislative vision is to back the Wall Street and Big Business blue print for America, i.e., the Law of the Jungle; Tudor's is to fight for small business and for the kinds of folks who can't afford to hire their own lobbyists.

It's nothing new for Blue Dogs to aggressively push their like-minded candidates, load them up with early cash and then use that demonstration of "fundraising prowess" to give the DCCC the excuse it needs to endorse them over a progressive. That's exactly what happened in this case. Edwards' biggest single contribution, $10,000, was from the Blue Dog PAC. The Blue Dog PAC gave $10,000 contributions this year to the following non-incumbent conservative corporate shills:

Ed Case (HI)
Chad Causey (AR)
Lori Edwards (FL)
Roy Herron (TN)
Stephene Moore (KS)

Edwards got an identical $10,000 contribution from the PAC of her Blue Dog sponsor Allen Boyd (The Harvest PAC). Keep in mind that Boyd was the only Democrat to sign on as a cosponsor to Bush's scheme to privatize Social Security. If Edwards is elected he won't be alone next time it comes up. Not only did she get more money from the Harvest PAC this year-- the most anyone else was given was less than half that-- and those were $4,000 pops to the 5 Democrats who voted most frequently against the Democratic agenda: Bobby Bright (Blue Dog-AL), Travis Childers (Blue Dog-MS), Frank Kratovil (Blue Dog-MD), Walt Minnick (Blue Dog-ID), and Glenn Nye (Blue Dog-VA).

The other Blue Dog with a PAC who gave big to Edwards was Mike Ross' Advance Arkansas PAC ($5,000), and then $5,000 slams came in from two Democratic leaders who are most interested in electing pliable, corrupt members like themselves-- Hoyer's AmeriPAC and Debbie Wasserman Schultz's notoriously sleazy Democrats Win Seats PAC.

In all, Edwards has raised $345,977 as of August 4, far less than the DCCC tells progressives they need to raise to get their endorsement and financial backing. And that's far less than half what the GOP candidate, Dennis Ross, raised ($810,875). Doug Tudor, whose donors have been told not to back him by Hoyer, Wasserman Schultz and other slimy DCCC operatives, took in $49,895. If he wins tomorrow, it will be because Edwards spent her money on useless DC consultants and he's managed to mobilize one of the most effective grassroots operations in Florida outside of Alan Grayson's. And because he stands for the kind of populism that Democratic primary voters are looking for.

So what about the Congressional Progressive Caucus? Oh, yeah... I almost forgot. It's the biggest Democratic caucus in Congress-- and it has the most powerful membership list. But it hasn't taken on the Blue Dogs in the electoral game. Members of the CPC have been over one hundred times more likely to donate to a Blue Dog-backed candidate than to donate to a progressive challenger! With CPC endorsements for Doug Tudor-- and 5 other strong progressives, Justin Coussoule (D-OH), David Segal (D-RI), Bill Hedrick (D-CA), Ann McLane Kuster (D-NH), and Beth Krom (D-CA)-- it looks like the CPC is sticking its toe into the world of practical politics. Here's the statement that went to the media about Doug Tudor's race:

Congressional Progressive Caucus PAC endorses Doug Tudor for Congress

Washington, DC – Doug Tudor has won the endorsement of the Congressional Progressive Caucus PAC for his election to Congress as Representative of Florida’s Twelfth Congressional District.

“I am extremely honored to accept the Congressional Progressive CaucusPAC’s endorsement and support,” said Tudor. “The Congressional Progressive Caucus has been at the forefront of the fight to ensure that the United States Congress represents all of the people of our country, building a more just and humane society. I will work hard in Congress to promote economic justice for all Americans, protect the Constitutional rights of all, promote peace and security, and ensure that our children and grandchildren inherit a world as beautiful as the one we now share.”

“The Congressional Progressive Caucus will be proud to have you as a member,” said Congressman Raul Grijalva, Congressional Progressive Caucus Co-chair.

The CPC is very different from the Blue Dogs. The Blue Dogs are best known for fighting on the side of the Republicans against Obama's agenda, often using their clout to water down the most progressive, worker/consumer/family-friendly parts of legislation as its being drafted. Their biggest "achievement" in the last year was destroying the public option and ruining the serious efforts at Wall Street reform. When reactionaries were looking for votes against women's Choice, they knew they could find them among Blue Dogs. Every single Democrat crossing the aisle to vote against Hate Crimes legislation was a Blue Dog. They may claim to be "fiscal conservatives" but they back Bush's catastrophic tax cuts for millionaires, unpaid-for-wars and subsidies for corporations, especially for corporations willing to line Blue Dog pockets. The CPC is the dynamic force behind every reform effort in Congress. The Blue Dogs largely line up with the Republicans to oppose them. It's what Polk and Hillsborough County Democrats should try to keep in mind when they go to vote tomorrow.

Democrats, Either Go Populist Or Face Shattering Defeats In November-- Yes, It's THAT Simple

Although most any Republican will do, let's go right to the bottom of the barrel: former Club For Growth president and Wall Street derivatives trader Pat Toomey, challenging Joe Sestak for the open Pennsylvania Senate seat. Toomey is one of the most aggressive advocates of dismantling Social Security in the GOP. Most of them are hiding their intentions; he's either too stupid or not skillful enough to do so. With over $1.7 million in "donations" from the Financial Sector so far-- and much more than that gushing into his current campaign, Toomey's most dominant message is letting his pals on Wall Street gamble with retirement money-- and take a hefty percentage for themselves in fees and commissions.

• Morning Call: Congressman Toomey was a "spokesman of sorts" for the Bush plan to privatize Social Security.

• Social Security keeps more than 700,000 Pennsylvania seniors out of poverty.

• Toomey's plan could have cost seniors $26,000 in one month alone.

• Toomey's plan would add $4.9 trillion to the debt.

• Republicans across the country are running from plans to privatize Social Security-- but not Congressman Toomey.

Well... they're just running from the appearance. Dismantling Social Security has been the #1 conservative dream for 75 years. And according to yesterday's Wall Street Journal, among other sources, conservatives don't only have the GOP on their side; there are also conservative Democrats-- and the ones who have sold their souls to Wall Street-- who are ready to go along for the ride. Remember, Speaker Pelosi and Harry Reid were smart enough to reject Obama's call for a deadly austerity commission, one that could only result in opening the door to anti-family solutions since the GOP members would never agree to anything without that. But Obama went ahead on his own and created a panel that looks like it is getting ready-- after the elections, of course-- to make some gruesome recommendations. Recall, George H.W. Bush failed Wall Street by being unable to pass NAFTA. Clinton and Rahm Emanuel completed the dirty job for them. George W. Bush failed Wall Street on Social Security privatization. Emanuel seems to have persuaded Obama this is a good political move. It isn't. As Digby pointed out yesterday, sacrificing Social Security on the alter of austerity is about as popular as human sacrifice (with the sacrificees). And her inspiration was Paul Krugman writing in the NY Times about appeasing the "Bond Gods."

As I look at what passes for responsible economic policy these days, there’s an analogy that keeps passing through my mind. I know it’s over the top, but here it is anyway: the policy elite-- central bankers, finance ministers, politicians who pose as defenders of fiscal virtue-- are acting like the priests of some ancient cult, demanding that we engage in human sacrifices to appease the anger of invisible gods.

...Late last year the conventional wisdom on economic policy took a hard right turn. Even though the world’s major economies had barely begun to recover, even though unemployment remained disastrously high across much of America and Europe, creating jobs was no longer on the agenda. Instead, we were told, governments had to turn all their attention to reducing budget deficits.

Skeptics pointed out that slashing spending in a depressed economy does little to improve long-run budget prospects, and may actually make them worse by depressing economic growth. But the apostles of austerity-- sometimes referred to as “austerians”-- brushed aside all attempts to do the math. Never mind the numbers, they declared: immediate spending cuts were needed to ward off the “bond vigilantes,” investors who would pull the plug on spendthrift governments, driving up their borrowing costs and precipitating a crisis. Look at Greece, they said.

The skeptics countered that Greece is a special case, trapped by its use of the euro, which condemns it to years of deflation and stagnation whatever it does. The interest rates paid by major nations with their own currencies-- not just the United States, but also Britain and Japan-- showed no sign that the bond vigilantes were about to attack, or even that they existed.

Just you wait, said the austerians: the bond vigilantes may be invisible, but they must be feared all the same.

This was a strange argument even a few months ago, when the U.S. government could borrow for 10 years at less than 4 percent interest. We were being told that it was necessary to give up on job creation, to inflict suffering on millions of workers, in order to satisfy demands that investors were not, in fact, actually making, but which austerians claimed they would make in the future.

But the argument has become even stranger recently, as it has become clear that investors aren’t worried about deficits; they’re worried about stagnation and deflation. And they’ve been signaling that concern by driving interest rates on the debt of major economies lower, not higher. On Thursday, the rate on 10-year U.S. bonds was only 2.58 percent.

So how do austerians deal with the reality of interest rates that are plunging, not soaring? The latest fashion is to declare that there’s a bubble in the bond market: investors aren’t really concerned about economic weakness; they’re just getting carried away. It’s hard to convey the sheer audacity of this argument: first we were told that we must ignore economic fundamentals and instead obey the dictates of financial markets; now we’re being told to ignore what those markets are actually saying because they’re confused.

You see, then, why I find myself thinking in terms of strange and savage cults, demanding human sacrifices to appease unseen forces.

And, yes, we are talking about sacrifices. Anyone who doubts the suffering caused by slashing spending in a weak economy should look at the catastrophic effects of austerity programs in Greece and Ireland.

Maybe those countries had no choice in the matter-- although it’s worth noting that all the suffering being imposed on their populations doesn’t seem to have done anything to improve investor confidence in their governments.

But, in America, we do have a choice. The markets aren’t demanding that we give up on job creation. On the contrary, they seem worried about the lack of action-- about the fact that, as Bill Gross of the giant bond fund Pimco put it earlier this week, we’re “approaching a cul-de-sac of stimulus,” which he warns “will slow to a snail’s pace, incapable of providing sufficient job growth going forward.”

It seems almost superfluous, given all that, to mention the final insult: many of the most vocal austerians are, of course, hypocrites. Notice, in particular, how suddenly Republicans lost interest in the budget deficit when they were challenged about the cost of retaining tax cuts for the wealthy. But that won’t stop them from continuing to pose as deficit hawks whenever anyone proposes doing something to help the unemployed.

So back to that report I referred to in the Wall Street Journal: "A White House-created commission is considering proposals to raise the retirement age and take other steps to shore up the finances of Social Security, prompting key players to prepare for a major battle over the program's future." Keep in mind, of course, that when our bipartisan political elites talk about "shoring up" Social Security, they mean dismantling it-- in the name of "austerity," which really means more tax cuts for millionaires.

The panel is looking for a mix of ideas that could win support from both parties, including concessions from liberals who traditionally oppose benefit cuts and from Republicans who generally oppose higher taxes, according to one member of the commission and several people familiar with its deliberations.

..."Are Republicans willing to sign onto a tax increase, and are Democrats ready to sign onto a benefit cut? I think the answer is probably yes in both cases if the other is willing to do it," said Alice Rivlin, a Democrat and former White House budget director. Some have suggested raising the retirement age to as high as 70, but Ms. Rivlin said she doubts there is support on the commission to go that high.

Some in the White House view a deal on Social Security as a confidence-building measure that could prepare the political system to tackle even tougher fiscal questions, such as the federal government's budget deficit. Asked about Social Security on Wednesday, President Barack Obama hinted of coming changes, saying: "We're going to have to make some modest adjustments in order to strengthen it."

...Liberal Democrats are already organizing to head off any proposal that cuts Social Security benefits, including any plan to raise the retirement age. They argue the program's finances can be fixed with tax increases alone and that benefit cuts would harm low-income seniors who have little savings.

"People would rather pay more or have revenue raised than cut the benefits," said Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D., Ill.), a commission member. She said she was fairly confident a proposal that included benefit cuts would not garner the needed 14 votes.

Many liberals are particularly opposed to any plan that would link cuts in Social Security to deficit reduction. They say that because the retirement program has long run a surplus, it is not to blame for the budget deficit. The commission's mandate is to examine ways to balance the budget and to address the growth of entitlement programs.

Outside the commission, Moveon.org, the Campaign for America's Future and other liberal groups are pressuring candidates for Congress to promise not to support benefit cuts, posting name-by-name results on a website. A coalition of 125 groups, called Strengthen Social Security, calls for closing the shortfall with tax increases alone.

The Journal then went on to lie about the AARP's position, trying to claim the biggest seniors organization in America supports cutting Social Security, a patent falsehood dreamed up in Rupert Murdoch's version of a newsroom. Here's AARP's own statement in response to the lies.

I voted for Obama in 2008-- with my eyes open. I knew what a centrist, corporatist voting record he had in the Senate and I already had a very clear understanding about how much of a compromiser (as in sell-out) he is. I voted for him for one reason-- he was much better than McCain. I would bet that my two partners in Blue America, Digby and John Amato, also voted for him. But Blue America didn't endorse him or ask our supporters to donate a dime to his campaign. If you still don't understand why, read the above again. Instead we were actively involved in electing men and women like Alan Grayson, Donna Edwards, Carol Shea-Porter and Jeff Merkley. If we get even a hint that a candidate might sell out to Big Business-- the way we seeing Robin Carnahan and Blue Dog Charlie Melancon doing this week-- they are automatically eliminated as potential endorsees. This year's crop of House candidates will stand up and fight for Social Security, even if that means fighting Obama. Even inside the Democratic leadership, we've seen we can't trust careerists and money-grubbers like Chris Van Hollen and Steny Hoyer. There are, however, populist candidates who will stand and fight on our side. One, who faces voters in a primary this Tuesday, is Doug Tudor who goes up against anti-working family Blue Dog Lori Edwards. Edwards was pushed forward by another Blue Dog, Allen Boyd, the only Blue Dog willing to sign on to Bush's plans to privatize Social Security. Edwards is further right and more dangerous than her mentor! And she was endorsed by the DCCC, of course-- their kind of candidate-- and, because of that, by a clueless editorial writer at NewsChief yesterday.

As longtime member of the U.S. military, Tudor's top priority is national security, starting with the end of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. He said he is "progressive" on many issues but admitted, when pressed by the News Chief on the "progressive" label, that he has solid liberal views. He also is confident, forceful, opinionated and knowledgeable about the key issues of the day.

Edwards, meanwhile, has positioned herself as a moderate Democrat. In a recent interview with the News Chief, she wasn't as well prepared as Tutor or particularly up to date on several of the issues, particularly immigration and national security. But what she has going for her is her ties to Polk County, which makes up the largest slice of District 12, and her legislative experience, including eight years in the Florida House of Representatives from the Auburndale-Winter Haven-Lake Alfred area. Tudor lives in Riverview.

...Tudor not only supported the original stimulus package, he said it did not go far enough and that another stimulus is needed. He said he was disappointed with the health-care reforms Obama signed but only because the Democrats should have fought for a government-run, single-payer health insurance system.

Tudor is a strong Democratic candidate for the District 12 seat, but in what clearly is a parochial choice, we recommend that voters send Edwards on to the general election. We believe her moderate stance on the issues is more in line with the majority of District 12 residents, and we certainly would like to see the seat remain with a Polk County-based representative.

So... what they're saying is essentially that Edwards is ignorant but at least she's Polk County ignorant. Doug's rebuttal will run tomorrow:

I commend The News Chief for its honesty in its recent Democratic primary recommendation. Basically, the headline could have read, "She's Ignorant, But She's Our Ignorant."

When speaking of me, the recommendation stated: "He also is confident, forceful, opinionated and knowledgeable about the key issues of the day."

When speaking of my opponent, the article stated: "She wasn't as well prepared as Tutor (sic) or particularly up to date on several of the issues, particularly immigration and national security."

All in all, the article concludes the voters should cast their ballot on a candidate's residency in Polk County, even though the district itself covers 2,000 square miles and parts of three counties.
 
I will keep this residency recommendation in mind as I attend Saturday's services for District 12 resident, PFC Paul Cuzzupe, who was killed in action in Afghanistan. While my opponent may be ignorant on national security, and while the News Chief may feel that only Polk County matters, I beg to differ. PFC Cuzzupe was from Seffner in Hillsborough County which is about 16 miles west of County Line Road. He died some 7,000 miles away from Polk County.

The citizens of this district need a representative who is "confident, forceful, opinionated and knowledgeable about the key issues of the day." In the News Chief's own words, I am that candidate.

Doug was one of Blue America's first endorsed candidates this year-- and one of our very best. Please pray for him on Tuesday.

Let's See Glenn Beck And John Boehner Blame Strategic Mortgage Defaults On ACORN Or Freddy Mac

This morning Ben Evans at A.P. reported that conservative Republican Congressman Bob Inglis has started coming clean on how his party's "leaders are acquiescing to a poisonous 'demagoguery'." He didn't specifically name John Boehner, Darrell Issa, Mike Pence, Eric Cantor or Steve King but his remarks sure smelled like he was talking about them. A.P. suggested he had Sarah Palin and right-wing talk show hosts like Glenn Beck in mind as "the culprits."

He cited a claim made famous by Palin that the Democratic health care bill would create "death panels" to decide whether elderly or sick people should get care.

"There were no death panels in the bill ... and to encourage that kind of fear is just the lowest form of political leadership. It's not leadership. It's demagoguery," said Inglis, one of three Republican incumbents who have lost their seats in Congress to primary and state party convention challengers this year.

Inglis said voters eventually will discover that you're "preying on their fears" and turn away.

"I think we have a lot of leaders that are following those (television and talk radio) personalities and not leading," he said. "What it takes to lead is to say, 'You know, that's just not right.'"

Inglis said the rhetoric also distracts from the real problems that politicians should be trying to resolve, such as budget deficits and energy security.

"It's a real concern, because I think what we're doing is dividing the country into partisan camps that really look a lot like Shia and Sunni," he said, referring to the two predominant Islamic denominations that have feuded for centuries. "It's very difficult to come together to find solutions."

Of course the widely disseminated, right wing propaganda about death panels that were so widely accepted by low-information, fear-driven and easily angered citizens-- especially those predisposed towards paranoia and racist-- and yes, we just described the teabaggers-- wasn't the only meme Fox, Hate Talk Radio and the GOP got out there to their noisy shock troops as they pushed divisiveness to a societal breaking point. Another was how Barney Frank and ACORN and Obama and the Democrats caused the housing crisis by enticing poor people (read: people of color) into buying homes-- as if Ronald Reagan and George Bush weren't trumpeting the same theme and as if the predator banksters/GOP donors were just innocent bystanders in the whole socialistic mess!

Today's NY Times breaks the news that any honest realtor could have told you long ago: the biggest defaulters on mortgages are the rich, making strategic business decisions to walk away from investments gone bad: "[n]o need for tears, but the well-off are losing their master suites and saying goodbye to their wine cellars... More than one in seven homeowners with loans in excess of a million dollars are seriously delinquent [and] by contrast, homeowners with less lavish housing are much more likely to keep writing checks to their lender. About one in 12 mortgages below the million-dollar mark is delinquent... 'The rich are different: they are more ruthless,' said Sam Khater, CoreLogic’s senior economist."

Whether it is their residence, a second home or a house bought as an investment, the rich have stopped paying the mortgage at a rate that greatly exceeds the rest of the population.

...Lenders are fearful that many of the 11 million or so homeowners who owe more than their house is worth will walk away from them, especially if the real estate market begins to weaken again. The so-called strategic defaults have become a matter of intense debate in recent months.

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the two quasi-governmental mortgage finance companies that own most of the mortgages in America with a value of less than $500,000, are alternately pleading with distressed homeowners not to be bad citizens and brandishing a stick at them.

In a recent column on Freddie Mac’s Web site, the company’s executive vice president, Don Bisenius, acknowledged that walking away “might well be a good decision for certain borrowers” but argues that those who do it are trashing their communities.

The CoreLogic data suggest that the rich do not seem to have concerns about the civic good uppermost in their mind, especially when it comes to investment and second homes. Nor do they appear to be particularly worried about being sued by their lender or frozen out of future loans by Fannie Mae, possible consequences of default.

The delinquency rate on investment homes where the original mortgage was more than $1 million is now 23 percent. For cheaper investment homes, it is about 10 percent.

With second homes, the delinquency rate for both types of owners was rising in concert until the stock market crashed in September 2008. That sent the percentage of troubled million-dollar loans spiraling up much faster than the smaller loans.

“Those with high net worth have other resources to lean on if they get in trouble,” said Mr. Khater, the analyst. “If they’re going delinquent faster than anyone else, that tells me they are doing so willingly.”

Laughably, Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Darrell Issa, Sean Hannity and other Republican clowns have tried to lay the blame for the housing problem on both working families and on progressives and no one more than on Barney Frank. It's become as much a truism among right-wing dim bulbs that Barney caused the housing bubble as it is that Obama is a fascist socialist Muslim born in Kenya or Indonesia. We caught up with Barney a few minutes ago at an airport on the way back to Boston. He had read the Times piece. "We've had," he began, "the worst economic situation since the Great Depression and it was caused by the right wing's commitment to deregulation non-regulation. And as to their blaming us, the Republicans controlled both Houses of Congress from 1995 'til 2006. I deny responsibility personally for the decisions of Newt Gingrich, Tom DeLay and Dick Armey. And I can prove that Tom DeLay does not take advise from me... because if he did, I would have told him not to go one that dance show."

Tomorrow the newest Blue America endorsed candidate, Fred Johnson (D-MI) will be joining us for a live chat at Crooks and Liars. This morning he told me that the Times report is "typical of the mindset. When it was working class folks who were underwater on their mortgages it was all about 'duty' and 'keeping your word' and everyone was supposed to just suck it up and keep paying their mortgages for the good of society. Now it hits the wealthy and suddenly a house is just a bad investment that they can simply walk away from. How about they start pulling on their own bootstraps for a change, instead of preaching to the rest of us? Of course, many of these folks got where they are through the very types of financial gimmickry that put the economy in the mess it's in now, so I guess it just shows that you reap what you sow."

Doug Tudor, the Blue America-endorsed candidate for the open seat in Hillsborough and Polk counties in Florida told us he had a similar perspective and took it right into the realm of everyday political decisions citizens have to make. “These people," he told me this morning, "have absolutely no shame, and they also have absolutely no love of country. This is just another example of the rich, and their Conservative career-politician apologists, taking advantage of the system at the overall expense of the American people, while further dragging our economy down with their wanton greed. The working-class people of FL-12 need to know their Representative in Congress will vote on their behalf to stop the rich from gaming a system to the detriment of middle-class America. Along with more robust financial reform legislation, we must also enact Campaign Finance Reform with teeth, so career politicians like Lori Edwards and Dennis Ross can’t use corporate lobbyist money to buy their way into the People’s House.”

Just about one year ago BlueNC, in its coverage of the mortgage meltdown, noted how local Congresswoman Virginia Foxx, who, except for her lack of influence, could well have been presumed to have been another divisive Republican fear and smear monger Inglis was referring to, couldn't wait to blame the victims for the collapse of Wall Street's mortgage gambling schemes. "As I sat and listened to the debate on H.R. 1106 on Thursday," wrote Betsy Muse, "I could not believe my ears. North Carolina Rep. Virginia Foxx blamed the mortgage crisis on the welfare mentality of dishonest borrowers who never intended to pay the money back. I have never been so ashamed of something that I personally did not say or do. It was disheartening to hear such bigotry come from a North Carolina representative to congress. Fortunately, Rep. Alcee Hastings of Florida set Foxx straight." This is what the Republican Party is all about and why it is so crucial-- no matter how imperfect the Democrats are-- to keep them from regaining power:

McChrystal's Gone; Afghanistan's Not

I lost a wager yesterday. Amato was certain Obama had no choice but to fire McChrystal after the now infamous Rolling Stone feature showed the Afghanistan War disaster was being run by a gaggle of arrogant, insubordinate, disloyal overgrown frat boys.

Since McChrystal took over a year ago, the Afghan war has become the exclusive property of the United States. Opposition to the war has already toppled the Dutch government, forced the resignation of Germany's president and sparked both Canada and the Netherlands to announce the withdrawal of their 4,500 troops. McChrystal is in Paris to keep the French, who have lost more than 40 soldiers in Afghanistan, from going all wobbly on him.

"The dinner comes with the position, sir," says his chief of staff, Col. Charlie Flynn.

McChrystal turns sharply in his chair.

"Hey, Charlie," he asks, "does this come with the position?"

McChrystal gives him the middle finger.

..."I'd rather have my ass kicked by a roomful of people than go out to this dinner," McChrystal says.

He pauses a beat.

"Unfortunately," he adds, "no one in this room could do it."

With that, he's out the door.

"Who's he going to dinner with?" I ask one of his aides.

"Some French minister," the aide tells me. "It's fucking gay."

...Even though he had voted for Obama, McChrystal and his new commander in chief failed from the outset to connect. The general first encountered Obama a week after he took office, when the president met with a dozen senior military officials in a room at the Pentagon known as the Tank. According to sources familiar with the meeting, McChrystal thought Obama looked "uncomfortable and intimidated" by the roomful of military brass. Their first one-on-one meeting took place in the Oval Office four months later, after McChrystal got the Afghanistan job, and it didn't go much better. "It was a 10-minute photo op," says an adviser to McChrystal. "Obama clearly didn't know anything about him, who he was. Here's the guy who's going to run his fucking war, but he didn't seem very engaged. The Boss was pretty disappointed."

That sounds fucking gay to me.

Amato thought right from the start that Obama would have no choice but to fire McChrystal. My take was that Obama is a wobbly leader who wants everybody to just get along and will always compromise to avoid a noisy kerfuffle. Who wants to face another firestorm from a bunch of drooling militarist psychopaths looking for charged, politicized excuses to force him to abandon his timeline? But I was wrong. Obama did the right thing, and I'll be happy to take Amato out for a nice raw vegan dinner-- probably at the new place in Echo Park, Mooi Food.

Alan Grayson was one of the first members of Congress to call for McChrystal to resign after the Rolling Stone story leaked. Actually, he first called for McChrystal's ouster last October. But, of course, Grayson knows that what's really important is ending the war-- and ending it now. “The ultimate issue is not McChrystal’s job. It’s McChrystal’s strategy. We need peace, not an endless war... We have to make our decisions on war and peace based on what's right for America, not what's right for the generals, or Halliburton, or Blackwater. Not what's right for the military-industrial complex. But rather, what's right for us." Grayson hits it out of the ballpark again.

Another Florida Democrat, this one a career naval officer running for Congress, Doug Tudor, is more concerned about the way forward in extricating the U.S. out of this no-win conflict than about McChrystal per se. He said McChrystal's firing was bittersweet. "I was proud to see President Obama assert a basic tenet of our republic-- civilian control of the military. I was saddened to see him recommit our country to the same failed strategy of counter-insurgency in Afghanistan. In the President's words, 'This is a change in personnel, but it is not a change in policy.'"

Tudor knows what he's talking about when it comes to this war far more than most people already in Congress. He deployed to Afghanistan 33 times. He worked on the personal staff of three commanders-- General Tommy Franks, General John Abizaid and Admiral William Fallon. I was in Afghanistan long before Tudor-- and under very different circumstances-- but our impressions of the place-- and of what must be done-- are pretty much identical:

Though I have traveled throughout the world, Afghanistan is without a doubt the most desolate, undeveloped country I have ever seen. As a member of our traveling team used to say as we flew from Islamabad, Pakistan to Bagram, Afghanistan, "This is the only time you can fly for two hours and go back nine centuries."

The policy President Obama affirmed today is called counter-insurgency. Counter-insurgency is a very complicated strategy where we try to win "hearts and minds" via military action and overall nation-building. In other words, if we kill bad guys and build roads, the overall population will decide to support us.

Counter-insurgency won't work in Afghanistan. Anyone who believes it will does not understand the lives, time, and money that must be committed. I also contend supporters of counter-insurgency do not actually support the vast investment America must make. Counter-insurgency will cost America trillions of dollars, thousands of lives, and an untold amount of international goodwill.

When elected to Congress, I will vote against any and all funding that continues the war in Afghanistan. Plain, simple, and period!

I like the clarity. You won't get that from most candidates for office-- and certainly not from the Blue Dog shill Debbie Wasserman Schultz has running against Doug in the primary. But it isn't only Grayson and Tudor who are offering clarity (and hope). Senator Russ Feingold (D-WI): "The comments of General McChrystal and his aides were very troubling, and the president’s decision to accept his resignation is appropriate. But I continue to have strong concerns about our misguided policy in Afghanistan. The massive, open-ended military operation in Afghanistan will cost a hundred billion dollars this year with no end in sight. Meanwhile, al Qaeda continues to operate and recruit around the world. After nine years, it is time to give the American people, as well as the people of Afghanistan, a timetable to end this war so our nation is better able to focus on the global threat posed by al Qaeda and its affiliates.”

Regardless of empty-headed TV talking heads with silly questions, Grayson knows how to get his points out. Ignore the foolish questions, but pay close attention to what Grayson wants to say:

What Is The Takeaway From Artur Davis' Thorough Thrashing In The Alabama Democratic Primary Last Night?

Wrong for the Democratic Party, Wrong for America, Fox "Democrats," Artur & Lori

Last night it wasn't only conservative corporate hacks like former-Blue Dog-turned-Republican Parker Griffith (who was slaughtered in the GOP primary, not even making it to a runoff against some nutcase teabagger) and Palin-backed Angela McGlowan (who came in a distant third in the GOP primary in Mississippi) who had terrible nights. Artur Davis has always been thought of as a Democrat with a bright future, until last night. He spent the last year and a half moving profoundly right: He went from a moderate 70.82 ProgressivePunch lifetime voting score to a dismal and reactionary 31.58 since Obama became President and, more importantly, since he started campaigning to be governor of Alabama. His vote against the health care reform bill was probably the last straw for his congressional constituents, who gave Ron Sparks majorities in 10 of the 12 counties that make up AL-07, Davis' own congressional district! Statewide, Sparks took 199,190 votes (62.4%) to Davis' 119,908 votes (37.6%). Davis' strategy-- one long encouraged by Rahm Emanuel and the DCCC (see Ken's perceptive stinky cheese story from yesterday)-- to move to the political right backfired... very badly. It's a losing strategy; when conservatives vote, they tend to prefer to vote for real conservatives, not Democrats playing the role.

Will the Democrats learn anything from Davis' disaster last night? Not. A. Chance. And especially not know-it-all powermongers like Emanuel and his female doppelganger Debbie Wasserman Schultz. They will continue hunting out reactionary candidates who apologize for being Democrats and, when they can slip into office, vote with the GOP.

A perfect example-- among so many-- is reactionary Blue Dog Lori Edwards, being fiercely pushed on Democrats by Wasserman Schultz. Although they're attempting to gussie her up as a moderate, Edwards is the only non-incumbent so far this year to be endorsed by and financed by the conservative Blue Dog caucus. Wasserman Schultz and her anti-Social Security ally Allen Boyd are hammering lobbyists and fellow Democrats-- including politically naive progressives-- to donate to Edwards. And why? So there will be another anti-government, anti-healthcare, anti-working family Democrat to cross the aisle and vote with Boehner at every opportunity?

The irony here is that the far more electable Democrat, 2008 Democratic candidate Doug Tudor, is also in the race. He isn't a self-funder-- a cardinal sin among party insiders-- and he wasn't an ass-kisser when he had the temerity to ask Wasserman Schultz for help back then. Last night, as Artur Davis' strategy of abandoning the same kinds of values and principles that faux Democrats (and DCCC faves) like Ed Case and Tim Mahoney have abandoned was blowing up in his face, we reached Doug Tudor and asked him about why party insiders always seem to be pushing anti-working family Democrats like Edwards and Davis in primaries.

“Lori," he told us, "may call herself ‘centrist’ or whatever other deceptive term she wants, but the truth is she is a conservative. Having never before run in a Democratic primary-- with the exception of the 2000 Congressional race in which she quit-- Lori showed her true colors early in this race when she actively sought the Blue Dog endorsement. Every Democratic and Independent voter who worked for and voted for change and hope in 2008 will do well to remember it is Blue Dog conservative Democrats who are blocking the President’s attempts to reform healthcare, to reform the financial sector, and blocking his attempts to extend programs which directly benefit working people and middle class families. Lori can join her conservative friends in decrying government, but she certainly shouldn’t be so callous to the many benefits government brings to the countless FL-12 residents who were hurt by the conservative economic policies to which she ascribes.

"As for me, I’ll stand with the many progressives throughout America’s history who have fought the battles that needed to be fought. It wasn’t popular to stand with unions, to end the Hoover-era giveaways to Wall Street and industrial robber barons, to provide a security net for our seniors, to integrate the Armed Forces, to integrate our schools and public places, to ensure the voting rights of all Americans, to provide health care to our elderly, and to expand that coverage to nearly all Americans. It wasn’t popular, but progressives like Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt, Harry Truman, Jack Kennedy and Barack Obama, as well as Dr. King, Robert Kennedy and countless American freedom fighters the country owes such a debt of gratitude to, fought the good fight and won. These are the names and the spirits I want to be associated with… not the names of John Barrow, Jane Harman, and Gene Taylor.

"As freshman Alabama Blue Dog Parker Griffith proved when he switched parties after being in office less than one year, conservative Blue Dog Democrats are just a press conference away from being conservative Republicans. There is a party for people with Lori Edwards’ political leanings, and it is the Republican Party." 

If you can, please help Doug and other real Democrats like Claudia, Marcy and Regina defeat Blue Dog reactionaries in their primary races, all of which are coming up quickly.