What's Worse, Republican Science Deniers Or Corrupt Transactional Democrats?

Where Does Tom Steyer Get His Targeting Advice?

Tom Steyer is a San Francisco billionaire and a dedicated environmental activist. Last year, he spent $11 million helping elect one of the most corrupt corporate whores in American politics, Virginia's new governor, Terry McAuliffe. A few days later, the Washington Post reported that Governor McAuliffe has joined a coalition of right-wing, anti-environment governors pushing for off-shore drilling. Steyer may be delighted he helped keep Ken Cucchinelli out of office but his boy McAuliffe joined up with Climate Change deniers Pat McCrory (R-NC), Robert Bentley (R-AL), and Phil Bryant (R-MS) to demand that the Interior Department allow Big Oil and Gas companies to drill, baby, drill off the coasts of their states.

This morning, Andrew Restuccia reported for Politico that Steyer has announced the first 7 states in which he's deploying his $100 million political budget for 2014. NextGen Climate Action, a super PAC, is targeting the Senate races in Colorado, Iowa, Michigan and New Hampshire and the governor’s races in Florida, Maine and Pennsylvania in what is likely to be the best-funded pro-environmental campaign in history.

So how did he pick his targets? I was at a board meeting the other day for one of the preeminent progressive groups in the country. The staff outlined their political plans for the cycle. As best I could tell, it came directly from the DSCC and was utterly unrelated to the progressive values of the organization. Grotesquely conservative Democrats in states the DSCC has signaled are top priorities-- Mary Landrieu (LA), Mark Pryor (AR), Kay Hagan (NC), Alison Lundergan Grimes (KY), Sam Nunn's daughter (GA) were the organization's top targets. No Shenna Bellows in Maine, no Rick Weiland in South Dakota, both of whom the DSCC say are too progressive for their states. Ironically, Weiland has a better chance of winning-- or he would if he were funded as well as the DSCC targets-- than Grimes and Nunn's daughter.

NextGen is bypassing key Senate races in which the Democratic incumbent has not put a major priority on climate change and renewable energy. The prime example is Senate Energy and Natural Resources Chairwoman Mary Landrieu’s reelection bid in Louisiana, where she has been a champion of her state’s oil and gas industry and a vocal supporter of the proposed Keystone XL pipeline.

While Steyer puts a priority on maintaining Democrats’ majority in the Senate-- he donated $5 million to a political committee tasked with getting Senate Democrats reelected-- his first order of business is changing the conversation on climate change, said Chris Lehane, a veteran Democratic operative who serves as Steyer’s top political adviser.

“This is the year, in our view, where we’re able to demonstrate that you can use climate, if you do it well and you do it in a smart way, as a wedge issue to win political races,” Lehane said.

Lehane said NextGen could get involved in more states eventually, and he indicated Steyer is already looking ahead to the 2016 presidential race. “Obviously we do have an eye both on 2014 and 2016,” he said, adding that NextGen believes that questioning climate science “functionally disqualifies you from being president.”

Steyer has previously said he’ll spend $50 million or more of his personal fortune on the campaign, a sum he hopes to match with $50 million in donations from green-minded donors. But until now, his group hasn’t fully spelled out all of the states and races where it intends to make its stand.

It’s a formidable task. Voters rate the economy and jobs as much higher priorities than climate change in almost every poll. And most of the Democrats that NextGen is supporting haven’t made climate change a major focus of their campaigns so far, even if they occasionally mention it.

Gary Peters, a Business-friendly New Dem, is the terribly flawed candidate in Michigan. Overly cautious and utterly uninspiring, Peters has, for a Democrat, a middling voting record on the environment. In terms of crucial votes on Climate Change since he was elected to the House he's got a 79.17 and a 68.75 on Renewable Energy. Those are not environmentally-friendly scores. If Steyer is looking to help the Democrats retain control of the Senate, backing Peters isn't a bad idea. But if Steyers is looking for allies in the fight for sound environmental and Climate policy, Peters will probably be as disappointing as McAuliffe. Steyer would be far better off helping elect a true believer like Shenna Bellows and giving a hand to incumbent Democrat Brian Schatz (D-HI) who is fighting off a well-funded challenge from an a horribly corrupt, anti-environment New Dem, Colleen Hanabusa. Schatz's voting record makes him the #1 environmental fighter in the whole Senate. He has a score of 100. Hanabusa, whose entire career has been predicated on which special interest pay her and her crooked husband/bagman how much for her votes, has a 75.00 on Renewable Energy and an 88.3 on Global Warming. It would be a catastrophe for the environmental movement if Hanabusa replaces Schatz.

Steyer is getting too much mediocre advice from the turds at the DSCC and the DNC. Maybe he should just fund an environmental PAC for the Holy See.

Pope Francis made the religious case for tackling climate change on Wednesday, calling on his fellow Christians to become “Custodians of Creation” and issuing a dire warning about the potentially catastrophic effects of global climate change.

Speaking to a massive crowd in Rome, the first Argentinian pope delivered a short address in which he argued that respect for the “beauty of nature and the grandeur of the cosmos” is a Christian value, noting that failure to care for the planet risks apocalyptic consequences.

“Safeguard Creation,” he said. “Because if we destroy Creation, Creation will destroy us! Never forget this!”

The pope centered his environmentalist theology around the biblical creation story in the book of Genesis, where God is said to have created the world, declared it “good,” and charged humanity with its care. Francis also made reference to his namesake, Saint Francis of Assisi, who was a famous lover of animals, and appeared to tie the ongoing environmental crisis to economic concerns-- namely, instances where a wealthy minority exploits the planet at the expense of the poor.

“Creation is not a property, which we can rule over at will; or, even less, is the property of only a few: Creation is a gift, it is a wonderful gift that God has given us, so that we care for it and we use it for the benefit of all, always with great respect and gratitude,” Francis said.

Francis also said that humanity’s destruction of the planet is a sinful act, likening it to self-idolatry.

“But when we exploit Creation we destroy the sign of God’s love for us, in destroying Creation we are saying to God: ‘I don’t like it! This is not good!’ ‘So what do you like?’ ‘I like myself!’-- Here, this is sin! Do you see?”… “Human action which is not respectful of nature becomes a boomerang for human beings that creates inequality and extends what Pope Francis has termed ‘the globalization of indifference’ and the ‘economy of exclusion’ (Evangelii Gaudium), which themselves endanger solidarity with present and future generations,” the statement read.

Wednesday, environmental champion Henry Waxman sent a letter to his colleagues urging them to oppose an amendment from West Virginia Big Coal whore David McKinley. "The flat earth society," wrote Waxman, "is at it again. Today, Rep. McKinley will offer an amendment to H.R. 4435 that denies that carbon pollution causes harm. Science denial will not solve the problem.

Earlier this month, our nation’s leading climate scientists released the National Climate Assessment, which confirmed that climate change is real, is caused by humans, and is already harming communities across America. The assessment explains that the scientific evidence is “unequivocal.”

Earlier this year, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the world’s premiere climate science body, released its authoritative reports on the state of climate science. The latest science shows that climate change is expected to exacerbate heat waves, droughts, wildfires, floods, and water- and vector-borne diseases, which will pose greater risks to human health and lives around the world. Wheat and corn yields are already experiencing negative impacts due to climate change. According to the IPCC, increasing global temperatures combined with an increase in food demand “poses large risks to food security globally and regionally.”

The McKinley amendment tells the Defense Department to ignore these scientific findings and the impacts climate change will have on our national security. That is irresponsible.

Republican science deniers may not want to acknowledge it, but every American taxpayer is already bearing the costs of climate change. And for those who lost their income, their home, or even their life in devastating droughts, floods, fires, or super storms, the costs are dramatically higher.

As it turns out, McKinley's deranged amendment passed this morning, 231-192. The Science Deniers included every Republican but 3 (Garrett, Gibson and LoBiondo) plus 4 of the most sold-out Democrats in the House:

• John Barrow (Blue Dog-GA)
• Henry Cuellar (Blue Dog-TX)
• Mike McIntyre (Blue Dog- NC)
• Nick Rahall (Blue Dog-WV)

How Corporate Democrats Are Wrecking The Party Brand-- From Michigan's Senate Race To California's Secretary Of State Campaign

Gary Peters, the Democratic candidate for the Michigan Senate seat Carl Levin is giving up, is a careerist and a New Dem with a mediocre and distinctly uncourageous record. Look as hard as you want at the Blue America Senate page but you will never find Gary Peters or anyone like him. That said, his likely GOP opponent, Koch puppet candidate Terri Lynn Land, is far worse. He's a nothing; she's a negative. She represents the Kochs and the selfish, greedy, venal interests of the plutocrats. He's... not as bad. The Democrats' Senate Majority PAC new ad (just below) is all about how bad she and how bad the Kochs are-- not a word, one way or the other, about their own feeble candidate.

Luckily for the Democrats, the "but the Republicans are worse" message still works for many voters. It's way garbage, cowardly candidates like Peters are plausible. The new Gallup poll, released yesterday, shows that young voters are still aligning themselves with Democratic Party messaging, in fact, more so than ever before-- or at least that they are more repulsed than every before by Republican Party messaging. Gallup found that "While young adults have generally been more likely to align themselves with the Democratic Party than the Republican Party, they are now much more solidly Democratic than prior generations of young adults."

From 1993 to 2003, 47% of 18- to 29-year-olds, on average, identified as Democrats or said they were independents but leaned to the Democratic Party, while 42% were Republicans or Republican leaners. That time span included two years in which young adults tilted Republican, 1994 and 1995, when Republicans won control of Congress. Since 2006, the average gap in favor of the Democratic Party among young adults has been 18 percentage points, 54% to 36%.

This Democratic movement among the young has come at a time when senior citizens have become more Republican. The broader U.S. population has shown more variability in its party preferences in recent years, shifting Democratic from 2005 to 2008, moving back toward the Republican Party from 2009 to 2011, and showing modest Democratic preferences in the last two years.

…In recent years, young white adults, who previously aligned more with the Republican Party, have shifted Democratic. From 1995 to 2005, young whites consistently identified as or leaned Republican rather than Democratic, by an average of eight points. Since 2006, whites aged 18 to 29 have shown at least a slight Democratic preference in all but one year, with an average advantage of three points.

Young whites first shifted to a pro-Democratic position in 2006, perhaps because of frustration with George W. Bush and his policies. Barack Obama's presidential campaign also may have attracted younger whites, given the candidate's relative youth, particularly since Republicans nominated the much older John McCain as their presidential candidate. Young whites are not as high on the Democratic Party now as they were in 2008, but they remain more likely to prefer it to the Republican Party.

Earlier in the week, Bill Boyarsky penned a post forTruthDig that shows how easily the Democrats could blow this advantage. His theme is "the irrelevancy of party and ideological labels when it comes to helping big corporations," an Achilles heel for the Democratic party that we talked about this afternoon in regard to Wall Street Dems and the Senate race in South Carolina. And he isn't messing around with red or purple states, but goes right to the heart of one of the crucial blue bastions: California, where the politicians are every bit as corrupt and slimy as they are in Texas, Florida, Pennsylvania and even New Jersey. How do you think young voters will feel about this kind of thing?

A recent California law freeing much of the telephone business from state regulation-- and potentially depriving millions of phone users of long-standing consumer protections-- illustrates the irrelevancy of party and ideological labels when it comes to helping big corporations.

Mark Toney, executive director of The Utility Reform Network, described the measure as “the most anti-consumer bill ever introduced in California.”

Just how this bill became law points up the importance of state legislatures and local lawmaking bodies, those governmental entities that although increasingly ignored by the media, influence much of the quality of our lives.

That’s where American politics are really at work. If the loud political debate and much of the punditry is to be believed, deregulation is the domain of Republicans and other conservatives. Regulation and consumer protection are Democratic and liberal. But in many crucial cases, that’s not the way it is. Take, for example, mundane but all-important phone calls.

…The new California law, SB 1161, takes away the power of the California Public Utilities Commission to impose these and other regulations on companies that use the Internet for delivering phone service. A CPUC analysis said, “Because virtually all communications service providers use (the Internet) at some point in their networks, SB1161 could … strip the CPUC of jurisdiction over services it now actively regulates.”

Party and ideology didn’t mean a thing when it came to this measure.

It was introduced and steered through the legislature by state Sen. Alex Padilla, a liberal Democrat who represents a working-class area of the San Fernando Valley. Liberal, but business oriented, Gov. Jerry Brown signed it into law. …The law is similar to “model” legislation that emerged from the American Legislative Exchange Council, best known as ALEC, a conservative, industry-backed organization that sponsors anti-regulatory legislation in statehouses around the country. ALEC also produced the “stand your ground” law that protected the killer of Trayvon Martin in Florida, according to the Center for Media & Democracy. The center said stand your ground was a “model bill” pushed by ALEC in “dozens of other states. ... The bill was brought to ALEC by the National Rifle Association (NRA) and was unanimously approved by an ALEC task force co-chaired by Wal-Mart.”

California’s phone legislation was strongly supported by Silicon Valley powers who are part of TechNet, an organization of technology CEOs, including top officials of Oracle, Cisco, Yahoo, Google and Microsoft.

“I have never met with ALEC, been to their conferences or anything,” Padilla said.

Padilla is well connected to the club of lobbyists and influential lawmakers who run the California Legislature. The telecom industry is a major part of it, having donated $1,986,976 to legislators’ political campaigns from January 2011 through December 2012, according to political data firm MapLight. The industry gave Padilla $39,364 of his total $1,329,743 in campaign contributions from January 2009 through December 2012.

In addition, Padilla was the beneficiary of a fundraiser held by Kevin Sloat, a lobbyist whose clientele included telecom firms. Sloat was fined $133,500 for that fundraiser by the state Fair Political Practices Commission, which said the liquor and cigars he gave the guests went beyond what the law allows a lobbyist to give. Derek Cressman, who is running against Padilla for secretary of state, called on Padilla to return money from the event. Rose Kapolczynski, a campaign consultant to Padilla, told the Los Angeles Times, “We take campaign finance laws very seriously and make it a practice to comply fully with both the letter and the spirit of the law. There is no indication from the FPPC that any of the contributions were improper and therefore we do not intend to return them.”

An opponent of the phone law, Sean McLaughlin, executive director of Access Humboldt, told me about attending legislative hearings on the bill.

“It was very interesting to me,” he said. “There were more than 50 well-heeled lobbyists [for the measure] and our ragtag group of public interest people.” Padilla and the other legislators greeted the telecom advocates as friends, McLaughlin said. “It was shocking how that played out,” he said. “To be in that room and see it was incredible. It was shocking to me, how much influence there was and how hard it was to even raise an issue.” He said the telecom lobbyists were not just witnesses for the bill, but “part of the presentation of the bill.” Speaking time for him and other opponents was limited, McLaughlin said.

“The thing that was discouraging to me was there was no media covering it,” he recalled. “There was this overflow crowd, the packed room was uncomfortable. Another dozen lobbyists in the hall. And they celebrated when the bill passed. I took out my little camera and they scattered.”

Will California Democratic voters even have the knowledge of Padilla's and the corporate Democrats' betrayal to nominate good government reformer Derek Cressman Secretary of State instead of Padilla? My bet is "no," although I'll be voting for him.

Conservatives Losing Again-- Turn Mean

I never said "motherfuckers" on DWT before and I recall even editing it out of guests' posts. But the sobs accompanying the tears I was just shedding weren't silent. They shook my whole body and they were loud. The sobs were for my country as it cascades towards dissolution, self-appointed arbiters of Americanism-- slaves to greed, selfishness and hostile bigotry themselves, from Rush Limbaugh, Michael Savage and Glenn Beck to Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity and Ann Coulter-- cheerleading the end of civility. I can barely write about it without shaking.

Yesterday, egged on by Republican political hacks and racists like Mike Pence (R-IN), John Boehner (R-OH), Virginia Foxx (R-NC), Paul Broun (R-GA), Steve King (R-IA), and Michele Bachmann (R-Mars), angling to seize power for themselves and their corporate masters in November, Republican losers in tri-cornered hats with a basic knowledge of the world around them straight from Fox "News," cursed and spat on some of the congressmembers who spend their lives working on behalf of ordinary American families in need of a voice to speak up against the might of generational and corporate wealth. To them John Lewis is just a "nigger" and Barney Frank is a "faggot."

Civil rights hero Rep. John Lewis (D-GA) and fellow Congressional Black Caucus member Andre Carson (D-IN) related a particularly jarring encounter with a large crowd of protesters screaming "kill the bill"... and punctuating their chants with the word "nigger."

Standing next to Lewis, emerging from a Democratic caucus meeting with President Obama, Carson said people in the crowd yelled, "kill the bill and then the N-word" several times, while he and Lewis were exiting the Cannon House office building.

"People have been just downright mean," Lewis added.

Watch Tim Ryan on the House floor speaking for almost all Americans (not Republicans, of course):



As Tim Ryan said, John Lewis has stood up to far worse in his heroic life and he's not likely to get turned away from the historic moment tomorrow when Congress starts down the road to putting the U.S. in a position to compete with the rest of the industrialized world, all of which makes sure their citizens are able to get healthcare. No, he'll proudly vote "aye," probably extra proudly after President Obama's speech yesterday. Here was part of it:

I have the great pleasure of having a really nice library at the White House. And I was tooling through some of the writings of some previous Presidents and I came upon this quote by Abraham Lincoln: “I am not bound to win, but I’m bound to be true. I’m not bound to succeed, but I’m bound to live up to what light I have.”
 
This debate has been a difficult debate. This process has been a difficult process. And this year has been a difficult year for the American people. When I was sworn in, we were in the midst of the worst recession since the Great Depression. Eight hundred thousand people per month were losing their jobs. Millions of people were losing their health insurance. And the financial system was on the verge of collapse.
 
And this body has taken on some of the toughest votes and some of the toughest decisions in the history of Congress. Not because you were bound to win, but because you were bound to be true. Because each and every one of you made a decision that at a moment of such urgency, it was less important to measure what the polls said than to measure what was right.
 
A year later, we’re in different circumstances. Because of the actions that you’ve taken, the financial system has stabilized. The stock market has stabilized. Businesses are starting to invest again. The economy, instead of contracting, is now growing again. There are signs that people are going to start hiring again. There’s still tremendous hardship all across the country, but there is a sense that we are making progress-- because of you.
 
But even before this crisis, each and every one of us knew that there were millions of people across America who were living their own quiet crises. Maybe because they had a child who had a preexisting condition and no matter how desperate they were, no matter what insurance company they called, they couldn’t get coverage for that child. Maybe it was somebody who had been forced into early retirement, in their 50s not yet eligible for Medicare, and they couldn’t find a job and they couldn’t find health insurance, despite the fact that they had some sort of chronic condition that had to be tended to.
 
Every single one of you at some point before you arrived in Congress and after you arrived in Congress have met constituents with heart-breaking stories. And you’ve looked them in the eye and you’ve said, we’re going to do something about it-- that’s why I want to go to Congress. 
 
And now, we’re on the threshold of doing something about it. We’re a day away. After a year of debate, after every argument has been made, by just about everybody, we’re 24 hours away. 
 
As some of you know, I’m not somebody who spends a lot of time surfing the cable channels, but I’m not completely in the bubble. I have a sense of what the coverage has been, and mostly it’s an obsession with “What will this mean for the Democratic Party? What will this mean for the President’s polls? How will this play out in November? Is this good or is this bad for the Democratic majority? What does it mean for those swing districts?” 
 
And I noticed that there’s been a lot of friendly advice offered all across town. (Laughter.)  Mitch McConnell, John Boehner, Karl Rove-- they’re all warning you of the horrendous impact if you support this legislation. Now, it could be that they are suddenly having a change of heart and they are deeply concerned about their Democratic friends. (Laughter.) They are giving you the best possible advice in order to assure that Nancy Pelosi remains Speaker and Harry Reid remains Leader and that all of you keep your seats. That’s a possibility. (Laughter.)
 
But it may also be possible that they realize after health reform passes and I sign that legislation into law, that it’s going to be a little harder to mischaracterize what this effort has been all about. 
 
Because this year, small businesses will start getting tax credits so that they can offer health insurance to employees who currently don’t have it. (Applause.) Because this year, those same parents who are worried about getting coverage for their children with preexisting conditions now are assured that insurance companies have to give them coverage-- this year. (Applause.) 
 
Because this year, insurance companies won’t suddenly be able to drop your coverage when you get sick-- (applause)-- or impose lifetime limits or restrictive limits on the coverage that you have. Maybe they know that this year, for the first time, young people will be able to stay on their parents’ health insurance until they’re 26 years old and they’re thinking that just might be popular all across the country. (Applause.)
 
And what they also know is what won’t happen. They know that after this legislation passes and after I sign this bill, lo and behold nobody is pulling the plug on Granny. (Laughter.) It turns out that in fact people who like their health insurance are going to be able to keep their health insurance; that there’s no government takeover. People will discover that if they like their doctor, they’ll be keeping their doctor. In fact, they’re more likely to keep their doctor because of a stronger system.
 
It’ll turn out that this piece of historic legislation is built on the private insurance system that we have now and runs straight down the center of American political thought. It turns out this is a bill that tracks the recommendations not just of Democrat Tom Daschle, but also Republicans Bob Dole and Howard Baker; that this is a middle-of-the-road bill that is designed to help the American people in an area of their lives where they urgently need help.

Clearly that video up there was Tim Ryan, an Ohio Democrat, not radical right corporate shill Paul Ryan from Wisconsin, the bank bailout king who has been making up all kinds of nonsense about the healthcare reform bill-- well, not making up... just recycling the same arguments that conservatives used when they opposed Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, the right of workers to organize, the minimum wage, child safety, women's emancipation, and so on. It's the same scare and smear tactics. Today Paul Ryan told his constituents why they shouldn't have healthcare reform. He touched on every debunked GOP talking point-- debunked but still ingrained in the craniums of the violent mob of teabaggers Glenn Beck, Steve King and Rush Limbaugh called out to attack Congress today. Ryan:

Congress stands at the brink of jamming through the largest entitlement expansion in 40 years, the largest tax increase in American history, and a consequential acceleration of our nation's march toward bankruptcy. Through a cynical "deem-and-pass" procedural maneuver, the U.S. House of Representatives is set to send the Senate-passed health care overhaul to the President's desk on Sunday, while voting on a "reconciliation" bill that includes an array of new tax hikes and back-room deals.
 
If the consideration of the bill progresses as the Democratic Leadership intends, the House will send the 2700 page overhaul of one-sixth of the U.S. economy to the President's desk without an up-or-down vote. The use of "deeming and passing," employing the budget reconciliation process, and making deals with Members behind closed doors have all fueled resentment among the American people, further eroding our trust in Washington. The ugly process speaks to the even more troublesome policies that have been unable to stand on their own merits. 

 
...When you strip away the gimmicks and the faulty assumptions, it is clear this bill does not reduce the deficit and it does not contain costs. Instead, it creates a brand new open-ended entitlement at a time when we have no idea how to pay for our current unsustainable entitlement programs. This overhaul imposes job-killing tax hikes on all Americans at a time when we desperately need to get sustained job creation and economic growth going again. Most importantly, this legislation fails to improve the quality and affordability of health care in America.

...We all agree that meaningful health care reform is long overdue, but it is increasingly clear that Washington's trillion-dollar, two-thousand page overhaul will not only fail to address what's broken in health care - but will actually make matters worse. If we are serious about reaching bipartisan solutions, we ought to scrap this massive overhaul and start over - working from a clean sheet of paper to advance common sense patient-centered reforms.

Conservatives-- on both sides of the aisle, will oppose the bill today-- just as they have opposed all moves forward, from the Declaration of Independence to the freeing of the slaves to consumer protections that were needed to save Americans from Big Business predators. And whether it's Paul Ryan, Republican, or John Barrow, Blue Dog Democrat, conservatives are the servants, first and foremost, of the wealthy special interests who will also demand a maintenance of the status quo and, as I mentioned as an addendum to Ken's post yesterday on why right wingers are trying to expunge Thomas Jefferson from our history books, an exceptionalism for a class of ultra-wealthy parasites living off the rest of us. A quote of Jefferson that drives them insane with rage: "There is a debt of service due from every man to his country, proportioned to the bounties which nature and fortune have measured to him."

There are parts of this country so steeped in ignorance and bigotry that there's no chance of voters understanding how they destroy their own interests by electing conservatives. But this year offers grassroots Democrats opportunities to replace conservative Democrats like John Barrow and Bart Stupak with progressive primary challengers Regina Thomas and Connie Saltonstall, respectively in Georgia and Michigan. And it offers an opportunity to remove particularly onerous Republican radicals like Virginia Foxx (NC) and Ken Calvert (CA) and replace them with thoughtful progressives Billy Kennedy and Bill Hedrick.

In a district widely considered "too red" for a Democrat to win in, Billy is making headway against Virginia Foxx without mincing any words and without ever buying into conservative framing. Yesterday, for example, he sent this to voters in NC-05:

This is an historic moment in our country. Tomorrow the Congress will either pass or defeat a health insurance reform bill. I believe the incumbent is on the wrong side of history, and that's why I wanted her to explain her vote against working families on health insurance reform. My question is, if it's okay for our tax dollars to subsidize a career politician's insurance premiums, why can't the politicians extend the same access and affordability to the tax-payers?

Time and time again career politicians try to scare us into thinking that helping working families is somehow a "government takeover."  My father was a minister and an educator. After he retired, he was elected Mayor of Black Mountain. He found that he could help others by serving in government-that GOOD government DOES help people. 
 
I am going to Washington because I believe that the bickering, grand-standing and scare tactics have to end.  Simply put, our leaders need to put the "service" back into "public service," and get back to doing the people's business in the peoples' House.

John Hall (D-NY), who is being targeted by Republicans in the hope off knocking off a progressive voice from a swing district, also announced his support for healthcare reform yesterday. This is the letter he sent to Upstate voters:

After listening to thousands of constituents, meeting with health care professionals, and reading the pending health care insurance reform bills, I have decided to vote YES on Sunday.

I held more than 80 public events and meetings to get input from local families, businesses, and health care professionals. I’ve heard from local business owners in Stony Point and Somers who told me they couldn't afford the annual double digit increases in the insurance premiums for their employees. I sat in a living room in Warwick where a woman told me her insurance company canceled her policy while she was undergoing treatments for breast cancer. I heard from countless Seniors who are trapped in the Medicare donut hole and have to choose between food and medicine
because they can't afford to pay more for their prescription drugs.

Tomorrow the House of Representatives will take an up or down vote. I will be voting YES and here is why. The bill:
• Immediately protects people with preexisting conditions
• Prevents insurance companies from dropping people when they get sick
• Prohibits annual and lifetime caps on benefits
• Closes the Medicare donut hole for prescription drugs
• Provides tax credits for small businesses who provide coverage for their employees
• Allows young people to stay on their parents' coverage until they turn 26, and
• Allows 32 million Americans who are currently uninsured to have access to high quality, affordable health care

You elected me to solve the problems we face. The status quo is unacceptible. We all know someone who is harmed by the current health insurance system. Just saying no will not change anything. This bill demonstrates we can make progress towards achieving our goals.

I will cast my vote YES

Another targeted Blue America alumnus, Gary Peters (D-MI) sent his constituents a similar letter last night, explaining why he too is voting yes today:

Far too many of our seniors, small businesses, families and loved ones are being hurt by a broken health care system that puts insurance companies and their profits ahead of people. That’s why yesterday I announced my support for health care reform legislation that will reign in costs, make coverage more accessible and end the shameful practice of denying people coverage because they or a loved one gets sick or has a pre-existing condition like diabetes or cancer.

I did not reach this decision lightly. I thoroughly reviewed this legislation and have taken into consideration the views of the thousands of Oakland County residents I've met with in person and the countless calls, letters and emails to my office. We need reform, but it was critical to make sure it was the right kind of reform. I said last year that health care reform legislation must do three things:  it must drive down health care costs for middle class families and small businesses, it must crackdown on the worst practices of the insurance industry and it must not add to the deficit. This legislation accomplishes these goals.

A vast majority of Americans want health care reform and support the approaches this bill takes to achieve it. It’s no secret that the insurance industry is spending millions of dollars trying pressure me and others in Congress to vote their way-- against reform. I want you to know that I will not be intimidated.  I represent you, not insurance companies or any other special interests. I read the bill, I talked with local residents and small business owners, I searched my conscience and I did what I believe is right.

...In the end, inaction simply was not an option. If we do not reform our system, businesses and families right here in Oakland County will suffer the consequences, and higher costs will continue to add to our national debt and weigh down our economy. The threat of losing health coverage because of a job loss or a serious illness, or not being able to regain health coverage because of a preexisting condition will continue to hang over the heads of families everywhere.  

These reforms are far better than the status quo. After discussing the issue for 100 years, I believe America cannot wait any longer for reform.

Landslide Victory For Gary Peters' Advanced Vehicle Technology Act of 2009

Yesterday Gary Peters' (D-MI) Advanced Vehicle Technology Act of 2009, HR 3246, passed the House with an overwhelming bipartisan majority, 312-114. Only one Democrat, conservative oil millionaire Harry Teague of New Mexico joined the GOP leadership in opposing. The call for mindless obstructionism from John Boehner, Eric Cantor and Mike Pence fell on deaf ears when it came to 35% of the Republican House Caucus. 62 of their members crossed the aisle to vote with the Democrats. The hard-core sociopaths and teabaggers like Michele Bachmann (R-MN), Joe Wilson (R-SC), Mean Jean Schmidt (R-OH), Steve King (R-IA), Paul Ryan (R-WI), Virginia Foxx (R-NC), David Dreier (R-CA), Pete Sessions (R-TX), Paul Broun (R-GA), Patrick McHenry (R-NC), Scott Garrett (R-NJ), Jerry Lewis (R-CA), Tom McClintock (R-CA) Lord Boustany (R-LA), and Dan Lungren (R-CA) all stuck to their knee jerk obstructionist stance.

Although they did vote for the bill in the end, several of the most reactionary of the Blue Dogs and their fellow travelers joined with the Republicans to try to kill the bill with a motion to recommit, habitual aisle-jumpers like Bobby Bright (Blue Dog-AL), Parker Griffith (Blue Dog-AL), Gene Taylor (Blue Dog-MS), Travis Childers (Blue Dog-MS), Walt Minnick (Blue Dog-ID), and Frank Kratovil (Blue Dog-MD).

Before the final bill passed Eric Massa (D-NY) introduced an amendment that sets the framework for the Department of Energy to work with the private sector to accomplish the goals of the bill. It passed by one of the biggest landslides of the year, 416-14, every single Democrat plus all but 14 die-hard teabagger Republican nihilists voting "aye." When Boehner can't even hold Bachmann, Foxx and Mean Jean you know he's in trouble. Needless to say the House's worst job killing member, slippery Wisconsin extremist Paul Ryan, stuck with Boehner and Steve King. Massa, needless to say was delighted. "During this recession," he explained afterwards, "we cannot allow energy independence and American innovation to sit on the backburner and that's why I presented this amendment. I'm proud to have had the support of 415 other members of congress and such an overwhelmingly positive response speaks to the bipartisan nature of strengthening our domestic auto industry... The future of the American auto industry and thousands of American jobs rest on the ability of domestic car companies to research, develop, and commercialize new, clean, efficient technologies that will be the backbone of a new US vehicle market... Beyond support for research and development, we must follow through completely on our obligations to the American people to develop real solutions to our growing energy crisis. We cannot be satisfied with abandoning new technologies every time they leave the lab. We must help our automakers carry these technologies across the finish line or face the alternative that we have seen time and again where US research is picked up and developed by foreign competitors or loses commercial traction and never sees the light of day."

Here's Rep. Peters on the floor yesterday explaining why this bill had to be passed:

What's Behind The Chrysler Deal Hold Up? Ever Hear Of Far Right Loon Richard Mourdock?

Richard Mourdock (R-IN), batshit crazy

Last time we caught up with Gary Peters (D-MI) he was trying to help his congressional colleagues understand that the excuse for paying out millions and millions of dollars in bonuses to failed corporate executives-- the sanctity of contracts-- never seem to apply when anyone is talking about the employment contracts regular working Americans have... like the auto workers, for example. But no sooner did that die down-- corrupt members of the Senate moving the protect their corporate paymasters-- when Gary took on General Motors in a way that I would have thought the Obama Administration would have-- demanding that they do not take American taxpayer bailout money and build cars in China.

You see, that was General Motors plan and they announced they were going to build a new subcompact car in China and re-import it here. Addressing GM management, Gary was very clear. “I am extremely concerned with the affect this plan will have here in Michigan. Our state has been hit hard enough already and we cannot afford to be disproportionately impacted by GM job losses. The purpose of providing General Motors taxpayer funded loans was not just to keep GM in business, but to preserve American jobs and bolster the U.S. economy.  We all know that GM must make cutbacks, but preserving as many American jobs as possible must be the primary goal of all restructuring efforts.” And GM paid attention, scrapping their plans to build the cars at a Chinese factory and promising to build them here in the U.S.

That hardly gave Oakland County's most proactive Representative ever a chance to relax. Suddenly the Chrysler deal started to unravel-- and Chrysler world headquarters sits right in the middle of Gary's district. Today's Washington Post explained the ruling from Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg that is holding up, at least temporarily, the sale of Chrysler to Fiat.

Fiat can back out of the deal if it is not finalized by Monday, and the government has warned that the only alternative would be to force the nation's third-largest automaker into liquidation, throwing the industry in turmoil and leaving tens of thousands of people without jobs.

The stakes may be higher for the Obama administration: If the court backs some of the claims, it could disrupt plans to rescue General Motors and weaken the government's hand in stabilizing the troubled economy.

"Every day that Chrysler remains in bankruptcy without consummating the sale threatens to postpone the resumption of production even further and to prolong the period of $100-million-per-day losses" financed by taxpayers, Elena Kagan, the U.S. solicitor general, said in a 26-page filing with the high court.

Behind the trouble, an extreme right-wing ideologue from the Rush Limbaugh fringe of the GOP, Indiana state Treasurer Richard Mourdock, who's as crazy as they come and sees more than willing to put his lunatic fringe ideologue ahead of the best interests of the people of his state (and the rest of the states). Chrysler debt was trading at 20 cents on the dollar.  Moody’s estimated it was worth 20 cents in liquidation.  The government offered secured lenders nearly 30 cents on the dollar, and most took it.  It was a good business decision.  Mourdock is making a really egregious business decision, at the expense of his state and his people. Bankruptcy law requires the court to ensure that secured lenders receive at least as much as they would in liquidation-- and in this case they likely get more. So, as the bankruptcy court and appeals court have said, the Indiana Treasurer’s case does not hold water and should not stop Chrysler from emerging from bankruptcy.

Mourdock says he represents working peoples’ pension funds-- why were those funds buying highly speculative securities at a discount?  These pension funds were turned into one of the vulture funds hoping to profit off of Chrysler’s demise.  Now he's pushing them towards liquidation.  Knowing Gary would be more in touch with this looming catastrophe than anyone else in Congress, we called him and got this response:

“What we have here is a State Treasurer who doesn’t know how to count.  He is willing to give up tens of millions of dollars in a fight over less than five million, and put four thousand workers out of a job in the process.  The legality here is clear; the bankruptcy judge and the appeals court are in agreement on that, and experts expect the Supreme Court to follow suit.  His actions are based on ideology rather than the best interest of his state and his country.  His case is wrong on the legal merits, it’s a bad business decision and it’s bad for the people he’s supposed to be representing.”

UPDATE: Supreme Court Tells Mourdock To Go Back And Study Economics 101

Gary was on Bloomberg today. He predicted the Supreme Court would end this delay immediately. And they did: "The U.S. Supreme Court lifted the stay on the Chrysler-Fiat deal on Tuesday, ending its role in the case. Earlier in the day, a bankruptcy judge on Tuesday approved Chrysler’s plan to terminate 789 of its dealer franchises."



Gary's response to the fast Supreme Court action was one of greta optimism. "Today’s decision is good news for the country. Chrysler’s swift emergence from bankruptcy has put the company in position to become more globally competitive and continue to support hundreds of thousands of American jobs. These proceedings were able to move so swiftly because Chrysler, the president’s auto task force, autoworkers, majority debt holders and others worked to help Chrysler undergo extraordinary restructuring prior to the bankruptcy filing. Major stakeholders realized that shared sacrifice was in their best interest, as a Chrysler liquidation would have caused massive job losses and ultimately cost secured lenders far more. The legally sound decisions of the U.S. district court and court of appeals provide an encouraging sign that General Motors can also emerge from bankruptcy quickly and continue supporting hundreds of thousands of jobs across the country.”

Are Selfish, Greedy Bond Brokers Keeping The Automotive Industry From Recovering?

With all the hubbub over the automobile industry we went right to our go-to-man on the scene: Congressman Gary Peters (D-MI), whose district is home to Chrysler World Headquarters and more auto suppliers than any other congressional district in the country. Please recall that as a member of the Financial Service Committee, Gary turned the whole A.I.G. hearing around when he shattered conventional Inside-the-Beltway/Wall Street wisdom by bringing up the disparity between how the sanctity of contracts for millionaires is handled compared to how routinely disposable contracts for working American families are.

Monday Gary, who's been busy crafting legislation that would allow laid off workers in hard hit regions greater access to existing support as well as to retraining programs for displaced workers, called on the administration to force concessions not from organized labor as it pushes the 2 distressed auto companies to restructure, but from the large financial institutions that are creditors to Chrysler and GM. Here's what Gary told us yesterday about his struggle on behalf of working families in Oakland County.

“The president has announced further short term assistance for General Motors and Chrysler, and outlined a process for the auto manufacturers and stakeholders to continue the difficult work of restructuring these companies. 
 
“The success of that restructuring is in large part dependent on debt holders’ willingness to cooperate with automakers and President Obama’s aggressive support in making that happen. Make no mistake-- in Chrysler’s case, some of these debt holders are financial institutions that exist today only because of government support. In fact, the three institutions holding the majority of Chrysler’s first lien debt are among the largest recipients of taxpayer money through the TARP. 
 
“Yet these institutions now stand hypocritically unwilling to cooperate with the government to help maintain an American auto industry and protect hundreds of thousands of jobs. These large financial firms must understand that the taxpayer support they were provided isn’t about enriching them, it is meant to protect jobs, get credit flowing to consumers and businesses and get our economy back on track. That means protecting jobs and helping our domestic auto industry weather the credit crisis they created so they can start selling cars again. History shows that getting car markets moving is one of the best ways to get out of recession.
 
“The president has offered General Motors and Chrysler more time, but time alone isn’t enough.  The president must use that time to support the auto companies as they strive to achieve the lofty objectives his task force has demanded.

Gary is the kind of candidate Blue America supports. Last year we helped him defeat rubber stamp tool Joe Knollenberg. Next year the GOP is vowing to target Gary and take back the district. I know times are tough right now, but if you'd like to help a deserving fighter for working families, you won't find many as consistent and as tenacious as Gary Peters. Even a $5 or $10 contribution would be a help, here at the Blue America ActBlue page.

Gary Peters-- More Than Just Rage Against The Machine

I can't say I was really dismayed at the demonstration of shortsighted posturing-- from both sides of the aisle-- when the members of the House Financial Services Committee saw the cameras begin to roll and they started playing for any home town constituents who might be watching C-Span 3 last Wednesday. It's what I've come to expect from our political elite. Longtime Finance Industry shill Rep. Spencer Bachus (R-AL), who has accepted, or solicited, a breathtakingly senatorial $3,789,474 from a grateful financial/insurance/real estate sector for his unstinting service on their special interests-- like passing the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Financial Services Modernization Act-- was particularly reprehensible in his timeworn role as defender of banksterdom. Pandering, whether to pissed off voters or dependable campaign donors, seems like an awful way for congressmen to spend their expensive ($174,000/year with platinum benefits) time.

By the time they got to Michigan freshman, Gary Peters, I confess I expected more of the same Democratic expression of anger towards Wall Street and not much else. I couldn't have been more wrong. Listening to Congressman Peters speak last week made me very, very proud that Blue America had endorsed him in 2008 and helped him replace rubber stamp incumbent Joe Knollenberg. Suddenly someone was speaking as though he respected reason and thought it worthwhile to strive towards actual leadership. If you missed his one minute speech please watch him:



I called his office and asked him to expand on his remarks and he responded with this statement:

When news broke that AIG planned to pay out hundreds of millions of dollars in bonuses, I was outraged. So were the American people, and rightfully so. AIG has received over $170 billion from taxpayers. My constituents and other Americans are finding it harder and harder to believe that such support is justified. Federal support for financial institutions was meant to prevent systemic economic collapse and job losses and get credit flowing to consumers and businesses-- not to enrich executives.

The AIG bonuses are especially outrageous in that they are being paid to the very people who brought the company to its knees and whose reckless investments helped drive our economy into the ditch. Bonuses are usually meant to reward good performance, but the people receiving these bonuses at AIG failed spectacularly. AIG says the bonuses are not tied to performance but rather are “retention bonuses” to encourage employees to stay at the company. This does not square well with the fact that millions of dollars in bonuses are being paid to individuals who have already left AIG. The bottom line is, as long as tax dollars are keeping AIG afloat, no executive bonuses should be paid.

Legislation that I co-authored will reclaim outrageous bonuses paid with our tax dollars that were given out to executives at AIG and other companies that received billions in taxpayer support. H.R. 1586, which has now passed the House, would create a 90% tax on egregious bonuses paid to executives of companies supported by tax dollars. Regular state and local taxes would recover much or all of the remaining 10%, effectively returning the entirety of these bonuses to taxpayers.

Many said there was nothing that we could do about the AIG bonuses because the company was contractually obligated to pay the rewards. I reject that notion. Thousands of United Auto Worker members in my home state of Michigan and across the country are making sacrifices and renegotiating their contracts right now as a condition of receiving federal support. There are thousands of white collar employees with contracts who have forgone promised bonuses and benefits and have taken pay cuts in order to save their companies. The CEO’s of both GM and Chrysler are working for a $1 salary this year.

Auto companies and their workers were told that agreeing to renegotiate contracts was necessary before they received a dime of federal support. The same should have been required of AIG and other financial institutions. I was not in Congress when it was first decided to provide support to AIG to prevent its collapse, but I am here now and am determined to work with my colleagues to solve this problem.

People are sick of the double standard in which working class and middle class workers are treated differently than financial industry executives. All that people are looking for is a sense of shared sacrifice. Wall Street does not seem to understand that yet, but they need to start soon. If financial executives think that they should be able to get preferential treatment over other American workers, they’ve got another thing coming. The double standard must come to an end and these bonuses must be stopped.

That’s why the legislation we passed in the House is just common sense. It will recover the bonuses, and do so in a manner that protects the sanctity of contracts. The bill allows AIG to meet its contractual obligation to pay the bonuses, and then recovers the bonuses through the tax code. The Senate should pass this legislation so that financial sector executives know that we mean business. Million-dollar bonuses to the very people who drove our economy to the brink of collapse are simply unacceptable, and we must move swiftly to stop them.

As the Administration and more than a few of the 328 Democrats and Republicans are succumbing to pressures from business and political elites to back away from the proposal, it's refreshing to hear someone explain the justice of it so clearly. Like I said, it's why Blue America supported Gary Peters in 2008 and it's why we feel like we made the right decision. It's also why I'd like to remind everyone that if we don't help members like Gary get re-elected, we'll wind up with a Congress filled with bought-and-paid for shills like Spencer Bachus and Eric Cantor. Gary Peter's Blue America ActBlue page is still open and I want to remind you that even $5 and $10 contributions add up to significant numbers in an election campaign. Blue America has managed to collect approximately $2 million for progressive candidates and causes and the average donation has been something like $35. I know times are tough but after you think about Congressman Peters talking about the double standards between the middle class and the self-professed masters of the universe, listen to Rep. Bachus at the same hearing and decide if you can afford a government made up exclusively of people like that?

Gary Peters Exposes The Double Standard Working Families Face Compared To The Masters Of The Universe

“ ‘Just say no’ is the right advice to give your teenagers about drugs; it is not an acceptable response to what our economic policies propose by the other party."

-Barack Obama, commenting on the Republican obstructionist tactics that basically are trying to push America off a cliff to destroy just to discredit his presidency.

In November, Blue America donors helped replace hapless Republican rubber stamp Joe Knollenberg with a former Michigan state senator who we identified not just as a solid progressive voter-- but as a progressive leader. In his introduction at the House Financial Services Committee meeting, Gary showed what a leader does. Amid a gaggle of finger-pointing partisan clowns, Gary made powerful and important points that went right to the heart of what a congressional hearing is meant to be. Today all Blue America donors should be very proud-- along with MI-09 voters-- that it was Gary Peters sitting there and not a shill like Knollenberg. Gary:

“In my Congressional district in Michigan, there are thousands of UAW employees who have employment contracts, and they’ve been told they need to renegotiate those contracts and make concessions to justify taxpayer investments. There are thousands of white collar employees with employment contracts who have forgone promised bonuses and benefits and have taken pay cuts in order to save the companies they work for. People are sick of this double standard where working class and middle class workers are treated differently than the financial industry executives.”

And The Winners Are...

Last night at midnight the People For the American Way competition ended with a bang. In all, 1,171 individuals donated close to $126,000. Half a dozen of the progressive Democrats on the list wound up with over $7,500:

Gary Peters (D-MI)- $33,857
Judy Feder (D-VA)- $31,687
Victoria Wulsin (D-OH)- $14,687
Dennis Shulman (D-NJ)- $13,769
Russ Warner (D-CA)- $9,259
Martin Heinrich (D-NM)- $8,959

Although Judy and Gary went back and forth over the past 10 days between first and second place, in the end it was Gary Peters who gets first prize, something he can surely use after Bush's fundraiser for the right-wing rubber stamp he's running against, Joe Knollenberg, this week.

After PFAW removed duplicate donors they announced that the second and third prizes (for most donors) went to Vic Wulsin and Dennis Shulman, each of whom is running against the worst member of Congress from their states, respectively Mean Jean Schmidt and Scott Garrett. Hopefully all of the candidates will win their contests in November. You can continue donating to their campaigns for the rest of the cycle.

What Can We Expect From McCain Tonight?

McCain's younger brother Joe-- the one who was rallying KKK members in Virginia a week ago-- has e-mailed the Baltimore Sun blasting his brother's campaign for making ads that show McCain as a "crank and curmudgeon." He attacked the lobbyists who have ruined his brother's chances to win the presidency and who won't let anyone-- meaning himself-- speak to the press. So with McCain's poll numbers continuing to sink dramatically-- in great part because Americans are finally sick and tired of the Rovian attack ads and viciously negative smear tactics-- McCain needs to do something dramatic tonight to put the race back on a footing that won't seal his doom and devastate his entire party.

Conventional wisdom has him reaching out to the older white voters, the last group of dependable voters to have started to move towards Obama, in states like Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Florida... even Arkansas. Early voters are breaking so huge for Obama that Inside the Beltway prognosticators are in shock.



When I was growing up, West Virginia and Arkansas were dependable parts of the Democratic coalition. Both have turned increasingly red in recent years. This week an ARG poll shows Obama ahead by 8 points in West Virginia, his first lead of the campaign. And McCain is down in Arkansas and with just a single-digit lead in a state that was a Republican "given" for the entire campaign. Can McCain turn it around tonight? Unlikely-- but he has to try. He'll target the elderly and especially elderly voters who have sinking investments and promises the Palin crowd that he'll bring the smears and sewage right into America's living rooms tonight.

So it'll be crazed hysteria about Ayers and ugly racism thinly disguised as a Rev Wright discussion, mashed up with half-baked and erratic and desperate rantings about economic pie-in-the-sky. To counter the predictable lies about Obama's tax proposals, the campaign has come up with a widget that allows you to type in your income and see what the results are if Obama's tax plans go into effect while McCain spews out his clueless lies in what is looking more and more like his last stand, as the failing McCain campaign tries defending deeply red bastions like Indiana and shifts its focus full time into voter fraud and media interest shifts to the Senate and congressional races. I even heard some talking head on TV mention them today!

Last night Senator Russ Feingold explained in Eugene why it's so important to elect Jeff Merkley to replace Gordon Smith as the Oregon senator:



In fact, Bush is in Michigan today, not on behalf of McCain, who he's given up on (and who has given up on him), but to bolster the sagging fortunes of far right extremist Tim Walberg, who recent polls show is losing his re-election bid to progressive Democratic state Senator Mark Schauer. Bush is expected to raise hundreds of thousands of dollars at the home of the neo-fascist billionaire Dick DeVos, former head of Amway and a failed candidate for Governor. Cheapest tickets are $5,000 and the money will mostly be split between Walberg and the other endangered Michigan incumbent, Joe Knollenberg. Blue America is raising money for both the Democrats running against these two, Mark Schauer and Gary Peters. Even one dollar helps build war chests against Bush's attempts to leave behind a right-wing force in Congress.


UPDATE: TOO LATE?

My friend's aunt Martha is even older than McCain. She's 95. Today she's breaking out of the British retirement home in Sierra Madre and moving into her own apartment. She's had it with being treated like an invalid! She's also had it with the Republicans. Aunt Martha has voted for a Republican for president every single election. Do the math and think about that. She voted against FDR, voted for Dewey, Nixon (several times), Goldwater... Bush. Last week she pulled up Tim Dickinson's Rolling Stone story, , Make-Believe Maverick, on her computer and cast her absentee ballot for Barack Obama. Obama may be planning to make a play for elderly white folks tonight... but he's too late to reach Aunt Martha. Last night David Letterman the 20 top 10 ways McCain can turn it around:

10. Try the old "I'll vote for you if you vote for me" trick
9. Inspire America by jumping Straight Talk Express over Snake River Canyon
8. Change name to Jorack McBama
7. Start wearing a cape
6. Step one: send Bin Laden free tickets to Giants game. Step two: when he shows up in East Rutherford, New Jersey expecting to enjoy some big blue smashmouth football: gotcha sucka!
5. Sizzling tango with Cloris Leachman on "Dancing With The Stars"
4. Put more effort into budget plan, less effort into Facebook status updates
3. Point out his steady leadership got us through the Great Depression
2. Assure voters the only poll that matters is in his pants
1. Get Sarah Palin to illegally fire herself

Top Ten Extras

11. Uh, stop being old?
12. Start hangin' with one of them talking chihuahuas
13. Suspend campaign until the economy recovers in about 30 years
14. Maybe one of them fake tans?
15. Have Palin start doing impressions of Tina Fey
16. Release new line of trendy hearing aids
17. Instead of boring speeches, read from hilarious Late Show Fun Facts book. Available at fine stores everywhere.
18. New catch phrase: "Chillax, Broseph"
19. Wear tighter slacks
20. An appearance on Sabado Gigante couldn't hurt

Why Are Republican Congressional Candidates Sinking Everywhere In The Country?

It starts with abysmal leadership

For months we've been predicting significant gains for Democrats running for Congress in every part of the country. This morning it's official: Carl Hulse and David Herszenhorn have affirmed it in the NY Times. Covering for laughable Inside-the-Beltway myopia, they claim that "analysts now predict a Democratic surge on a scale that seemed unlikely just weeks ago, with even some Republicans in traditional strongholds fighting for their political careers, and Democratic leaders dreaming of ironclad majorities." And they blame the Wall Street meltdown, rather than a gestalt where the Wall Street meltdown and whatever follows it is a symptom of now loathed Republican misrule.

As we've explained before, the open Republican seats in Virginia, New Mexico and Colorado are out of grasp of the extreme rightists running for those seats. McCain strategists have written off Elizabeth Dole in North Carolina and Al Franken just whipped Norm Coleman in two consecutive Minnesota polls. John Sununu (R-NH) has had a big "loser" sign painted on him all year and it's never coming off and the news on Gordon Smith has been so terrible-- I mean the guy;s frozen food factory was busted for employing undocumented workers a few weeks ago-- that it's hard to imagine that in the current electoral climate he can win. Much depends on the outcome of his bribery trial but corrupt Alaska Senator Ted Stevens has come out on the wrong side of every poll in the last 5 or 6 months. One of the two Mississippi races, Wicker's re-election bid, looks very rocky, And although they are tougher races, Democratic challengers have shots in Texas, Maine, Georgia, Kentucky, Oklahoma, Idaho, and Nebraska.

In the House, Democrats say they could capture a dozen of the 26 Republican seats left open by retirements, and challengers are closing in on Republican incumbents in Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Michigan, Nevada, New York and elsewhere.

“The last week has severely damaged Republican candidates,” said Stuart Rothenberg, a nonpartisan analyst who predicts that Democrats could gain as many as six to nine Senate seats and 25 to 30 House seats. “Everything points to warning signals for Republicans.”

If such projections by Mr. Rothenberg and others are realized, it would push Senate Democrats tantalizingly close to the filibuster-proof 60-vote majority that has eluded Senate leaders since the late 1970s. While the environment could change again in the remaining weeks, recent polling suggests a fundamental shift, with Republicans absorbing more of the blame for the economic uncertainty.

At the same time, the political arms of Congressional Republicans are being outspent-- their House organization recently borrowed $8 million-- and have fewer targets, with only a handful of Democrats in Florida, Louisiana, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Texas and Wisconsin and in potential trouble.

Republicans are understandably nervous.

...Strategists for both parties say Republican House and Senate candidates are being hurt by the dip in support for Senator John McCain at the top of the ticket, frustrating Republicans who had initially viewed Mr. McCain as a strong asset who could appeal to independents and even moderate Democrats and protect Republicans in a tough year.

But the market volatility and perceived Democratic edge on handling the economy has evidently turned voters to Democrats, a view supported by one top adviser to Republican candidates.

“This financial crisis has provided momentum to Barack Obama and other Democrats, and their campaigns now have the wind at their backs,” said the consultant, who asked not to be identified speaking pessimistically about the Republican outlook.

Look at the upstate New York race that pits progressive Democrat Dan Maffei against reactionary Republican Dale Sweetland. A brand new poll shows Maffei with an 18 point lead! And it's far more than just the pinch in people's wallets. The feeling everywhere in the country is that the Republican Party has strayed too far from the mainstream and have lost touch with regular Americans. Republican registration has plummeted while Democratic registration is through the roof. But pick any serious race-- or even one of the dozens of races rapidly becoming serious-- and you'll see why Democrats are ahead and moving further ahead. Let me pull one up at random--- eenie, meanie, minie, Joe... yes Joe Knollenberg serving his eighth term representing moderate, suburban Oakland County near Detroit (MI-09). If the guy was ever on the ball he's completely lost it. Forget for a moment that he's been a Bush rubber stamp on every single issue domestic and foreign and forget that he flip-flopped on Paulson's Wall Street bailout-- against it like his constituents, and then for it like his campaign contributors ($362,500 from Finance, Insurance and Real Estate). Instead think about what kind of an utterly out-of-touch mentality it takes to buy into a late night comedy show punchline like this:

Knollenberg said Wednesday he had asked Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, Republican John McCain's running mate, to campaign with him in Oakland County. McCain's campaign pulled out of Michigan last week and Palin said she was disappointed by the tactical move.

"She's an exciting lady. She's somebody who knows something about the real world. The governor of Alaska obviously is very much involved in national security because Alaska touches very close to Russia and Russia is not all that happy with us right now nor are we with them," Knollenberg said.

Highlighting the absurdity of Knollenberg's flight from reality, the Michigan Democratic Party has invited Tina Fey to come campaign in Michigan. New polling out this morning from Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research confirms that Peters is beating the incumbent. Knollenberg's job approval rating is down to 34% and the new polls shows a 43- 40% lead for Peters.

East of MI-09 is a district represented by one of the most radical right extremists in Congress, Tim Walberg. Polls show him losing badly to state Senator Mark Schauer, who has significant support not just from wildly enthusiastic Democrats and from independents but even from mainstream Republicans embarrassed to be represented by someone from the political fringe. It's worth comparing the brand new ads of the two candidates. Walberg's is about... Michael Moore. Here's Mark Schauer's; another example of way the congressional races are turning into a route:



Although Karl Rove, whose future residency in or out of federal prison is likely to hang on the outcome of the election, is still banking on the capriciousness, ignorance and stupidity of undecided voters, less biased political observers are starting to whisper the word landslide. Obama's coattails have already proven themselves as strong as McCain's are toxic. An Obama landslide will be something Republican members of Congress will remember for decades.

Obviously, what the mainstream media would never think of looking into is the differences between progressive Democrats and nominal Democrats from the Republican wing of the Democratic Party, something we looked at yesterday. The differences however, are very real and very crucial and it means a lot more to elect one Darcy Burner or one Gary Peters than a dozen pseudo-Democrats like Paul Carmouche, Bobby Bright or Jerry Connolly. If you'd like to help, you'll find all good ones and no bad ones here at the Blue America ActBlue page.

Why Are Republican Incumbents Afraid To Debate In Their Home Districts?

After seeing what an incredibly effective speaker Oregon Senate candidate Jeff Merkley is, I was interested in knowing if he would be debating Bush's rubber stamp mouthpiece Gordon Smith. So I asked. His campaign has proposed a series of 8 debates. Merkley has committed to five specific debates around the state with different Oregon television stations and nonpartisan public service groups. So far Gordon Smith hasn't committed to any. But let's be fair, if you had a record like his-- in a state like Oregon-- would you want to defend it in public? But they I started seeing a surprising pattern: Republican incumbents all over the country are avoiding or minimizing the number of debates they're willing to have with Democrats.

Yesterday, almost in passing, we saw how Bush rubber stamp Charlie Dent refuses to debate Sam Bennett about energy policy. “Congressman Dent is so deep in the pocket of Big Oil companies and special interest groups he’s refusing to publicly defend his record and have an open debate about the issue,” said Kathryn Seck, Sam Bennett’s campaign manager. “He should explain why he’s taken $75,000 from Big Oil and given them billions in tax breaks while middle class Pennsylvanians are struggling to afford high gas prices.  Voters deserve an open dialogue on the issues and Congressman Dent is ducking the issue.” Then this morning I got a press release from Iowa's 4th CD (the north central part of the state, centered in Ames). And sure, enough, the Bush rubber stamp incumbent, Tom Latham, is refusing to debate the Democratic candidate Becky Greenwald.

Tom Latham refused this week to debate Becky Greenwald while he is home on the August recess. The Greenwald campaign accepted a debate with Latham at the Iowa Farmer’s Union Convention, an event that Latham is attending. Latham refused to debate.
 
“We are disappointed that Tom Latham refused to debate Becky Greenwald at the Iowa Farmer’s Union Convention. We tried to work with his schedule and find a venue for a debate at an event Latham would already be attending,” said Campaign Manager Robert Brennan. “Iowans deserve to hear from Tom Latham why after 14 years in Congress, he has done nothing to address the energy crisis, lack of care for our veterans and the high cost of healthcare.”
 
Last week, the Greenwald campaign sent a letter to the Latham campaign asking to hold four debates over the August recess. The Latham campaign refused the debates saying their schedule was full. The Iowa Farmers Union tried to accommodate with his schedule and arrange for a debate at their convention in Marshalltown, IA on Saturday August 23rd, an event that Latham will be attending. The Latham campaign refused to debate.

Was I looking at a pattern? I reached out to a few of the campaigns I speak to regularly. Gary Peters (D-MI) has accepted invitations from the Troy Chamber of Commerce-- and even from the Troy Republican Party Club, as well as from other groups who have been trying to set up debates. Joe Knollenberg-- a Big Oil shill who has accepted $66,250 in "donations" from Big Oil and owns over $90,000 in oil company stocks that increase in value as gasoline prices rise-- is petrified to stand up in front of an audience of voters and defend his energy voters.

Annette Taddeo debates empty chair in Miami

In May the AFL-CIO, which had endorsed Ileana Ros-Lehtinen and Mario and Lincoln Diaz-Balart in 2006, invited their 3 candidates plus Democratic challengers Annette Taddeo, Joe Garcia and Raul Martinez to a debate. The three Republicans, panicking at the last moment, ducked the debate. Each blamed scheduling conflicts. The AFL-CIO went on with the debate-- Annette told me she debated Ros-Lehtinen's empty chair-- and then endorsed the debate winners, the three Democrats.

South Florida congressional Republicans backed out of next week's debates. Their opponents say they're hiding.

Miami's three Cuban-American Republicans in Congress have scrapped plans to participate in a series of debates with their Democratic challengers.

The South Florida AFL-CIO, which in recent years has hosted debates for mayoral and gubernatorial races, planned three debates next week for the nationally watched contests. But the Republicans said this week that they're not going, throwing the bipartisan nature of the event into doubt.

The union-- which endorsed the three incumbents in 2006-- says the events will go on next week as scheduled. All three Democrats, who represent the first significant challenge to the incumbents, said they plan to attend and suggested the Republicans were reluctant to spar face to face.

"We just want to give our working families a chance to talk to the candidates,'' said union president Fred Frost, who met late Wednesday with representatives from two of the Republican campaigns in a bid to revive the events. "I think they'd be squandering what I'd consider a great opportunity."

In New Jersey Dennis Shulman has been trying to get incumbent Scott Garrett to debate him in front of voters. Apparently Garrett-- like fellow extremist loon and Big Oil shill John Kline in Minnesota-- just doesn't think he has to do debates. Kline's spokesperson said his record speaks for itself. It does-- and if voters were actually reading it Kline wouldn't get 30% of the vote.

Last year Darcy Burner was eager to debate incumbent Bush rubber stamp Dave Reichert everywhere in the district. His staff, wary of putting him into unscripted settings because he has a tendency to either put his foot in his mouth or reveal his lack of policy depth, allowed him to do one debate, which was sponsored by the Seattle Times. The Times debate for 2008 is scheduled for October 8 and Reichert is going to do it. Meanwhile, though, there have been debates proposed by KCTS-9 and the Seattle Post-Intelligencer as well as by TV station KING 5 and radio stations KUOW and KIRO 710. Darcy wants debates. Reichert wants to hide. Similarly, Bob Lord has challenged John Shadegg who refuses to talk, only waves his toy air pressure gauge over his head and mutters incoherently about running for the Senate. Shadegg won't say yes or no about debates. Last year Vic Wulsin was able, after embarrassingly her repeatedly, to get Mean Jean Schmidt, one of the House's most woefully ignorant members, to do one debate. Vic would like to do a series of debates across the district to talk about how to help solve the economic conditions of Ohio families hit hard by recession, the housing crisis, gasoline prices, unemployment, the health care crisis and inflation but Mean Jean isn't answering. The Ohio News Network has asked both candidates to debate in October but it looks like Vic may have the stage to herself.

Most of the Senate races have at least one debate scheduled. But Gordon Smith isn't the only senatorial coward hiding from his Democratic opponent. John Cornyn (R-TX) doesn't feel comfortable unless he's speaking at places like the Petroleum Club in Fort Worth. Big Oil has given him more money this year ($480,100) than any other member of Congress (other than the million plus they gave to ExxonJohn McCain) and he's backed them all the way, which is precisely why you're paying around $4/gallon at the pump. But when it comes to debating Rick Noriega about his votes, Cornyn is full of... petroleum. Plenty of TV and radio stations, as well as civic organizations throughout Texas, have reached out to the two campaigns for debates. Noriega keeps accepting invitation. Cornyn claims he's negotiating. But he isn't even doing that-- unless he's negotiating with himself.

Just as I was about to publish this, I got an e-mail from Andrea Miller, the powerfully articulate and knowledgeable Democratic candidate running against dull rubber stamp Randy Forbes in southern Virginia. Her experience is almost identical to at least half, perhaps three-quarters of Democratic challengers:

Randy Forbes is avoiding me big time. There have been at least 3 requests (2 from radio and 1 from TV). Additionally, there has also been a debate request from a group that simply wants to schedule a public forum.
 
What is he afraid of? I have an energy policy and he has energy questions. I have solutions to our education challenges and he doesn't even know there is a problem.

My guess: he's just afraid of Andrea Miller and getting his ass kicked publicly in front of the electorate when she exposes his indefensible voting record.