Which Florida Politicians Should Be Serving Time In Prison Instead of Congress?

Patrick Murphy and Debbie Wasserman Schultz, as bad as any Republican

At the end of March PolitiFact weighed into the fight between Tim Canova and Debbie Wassermann Schultz over her career-long practice of soliciting bribes from the finance industry in return for carrying their agenda even when it conflicts with the interests of her own constituents. PolitiFact looked at a statement by Canova that Wasserman Schultz disputed: "After taking hundreds of thousands of dollars from Goldman Sachs and other Wall Street banks, (Debbie Wasserman Schultz) has voted to prevent the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau from regulating payday loans and addressing racial discrimination in car loans."

"Did Canova accurately describe her donations from banks and her votes related to payday loans," was at the crux of the thorough investigation PolitiFact undertook.

Canova’s campaign pointed to donations from banks, securities/investment firms and finance/credit companies to Wasserman Schultz’s campaign committee and her political action committee, or PAC.

At PolitiFact Florida’s request, the Center for Responsive Politics compiled the large individual donations (more than $200) and donations to her PAC starting with her 2006 election. The center found she received $309,020 from commercial banks, which represented about 2 percent of the total; $408,450 from securities/investment firms, and $325,850 from finance/credit companies.

Her leadership PAC, Democrats Win Seats, received donations from the Goldman Sachs PAC: $5,000 in 2016 and $10,000 in 2014.

...Payday loans are small, short-term loans that borrowers promise to repay out of their next paycheck at a high rate of interest. It is a controversial industry that targets the poor and is disproportionately located in minority communities.

For years, payday loans were unregulated by the federal government, although some states had their own laws.

President Barack Obama took a step toward regulating the industry when he signed a bill in 2010 that included the creation of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Republicans have targeted the bureau for years.

Enter some Democrats into the fray-- including Wasserman Schultz, who has gotten about $68,000 from payday lenders, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

...More than 200 consumer or civil rights groups-- including the NAACP, National Council of La Raza, Southern Poverty Law Center and the Consumer Federation of America-- wrote a letter to Congress urging them to defeat the bill. They argued that the bill favors an "industry-backed Florida law" and would hurt consumers.

Florida’s 2001 payday loan law was a compromise and included protections that were intended to help the poor avoid an endless cycle of debt. But the loans leave consumers stuck on a debt treadmill in Florida, where they have racked up $2.5 billion in fees since 2005, according to the Center for Responsible Lending’s March report. In the past year, the average Florida payday loan had an annual rate of 278 percent.

Richard Cordray, head of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, disputed Ross’ description of Florida’s law as the "gold standard" during a congressional hearing on March 16.

In Florida, "these loans are still being made above the 300 percent, and they are being rolled over on average nine times," Cordray said.

Our ruling

Canova says Wasserman Schultz "after taking hundreds of thousands of dollars from Goldman Sachs and other Wall Street banks, has voted to prevent the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau from regulating payday loans and addressing racial discrimination in car loans."

Her campaign committee and PAC have taken $309,020 from commercial banks since her re-election campaign in 2006-- about 2 percent of the total. That includes $15,000 in donations from Goldman Sachs to her leadership PAC.

The payday loan bill hasn’t had a vote in the House yet, although Wasserman Schultz is a co-sponsor. The bill would not prevent the bureau from regulating payday loans entirely, but it would cede power to the states, including Florida, which has its own payday law that some advocates have criticized as weak.

She voted for a bill that squashed bureau guidelines that were intended to provide clarity about the law on racial discrimination related to car loans.

We rate this claim Mostly True.

Then this Tuesday the Miami Herald ran an exposé on the most corrupt politicians in Florida taking bribes from the payday lenders. As expected, Wasserman Schultz was among the worst of the worst. The short list of Florida corruption in Congress:

• Alcee Hastings
• Patrick Murphy
• Debbie Wasserman Schultz

They also included Wasserman Schultz's corrupt protégé, Kendrick Meek, who is no longer in Congress but working as a lobbyist (of course) and took $72,800 in bribes from the payday lenders while he was in Congress.

Payday lenders have donated about $2.5 million to Florida politicians and both political parties in recent years, according to a new analysis by a liberal group.

Allied Progress has drawn attention to the issue of payday lending in Florida by attacking U.S. Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the Democratic National Committee chair, and other politicians who have taken money from the industry.

The group gave the Miami Herald an advanced copy of its new report, “A Florida Plan: How payday lenders bought Florida’s political establishment.” The report lists donations given to federal and state candidates as well as the state’s Republican and Democratic parties since 2009.

Overall, Republicans received $1.6 million and Democrats received about $890,000, while $29,000 went to independents. But the top individual recipients were South Florida Democrats:

• U.S. Rep. Alcee Hastings of Delray Beach: $110,700;

• Former U.S. Rep Kendrick Meek, who ran for the U.S. Senate in 2010: $72,800;

• U.S. Rep. Patrick Murphy of Jupiter, who is running for the Senate: $51,000;

• Wasserman Schultz of Weston: $50,600.

The Republican Party of Florida received $1,083,447, and the Florida Democratic Party received about $366,500.


...“Florida’s political establishment has pushed the disastrous Florida model of payday lending on the rest of the country because they have been bought by the industry and one family and company in particular,” said Karl Frisch, executive director of Allied Progress.




The issue of payday lending has become a thorn in the side of Wasserman Schultz, who is facing her first re-election primary challenge since winning the seat in 2004.


...The donations she received from the payday industry are a small portion of the millions of dollars Wasserman Schultz has raised for her re-election campaigns.

Payday loans could become a topic in the Democratic Senate primary, in which Murphy faces U.S. Rep. Alan Grayson.

Last year, Grayson signed the joint letter that defended Florida’s law, but later said he would oppose the bill filed by Ross because of the two-year waiting period.

Murphy said in April that Florida’s regulations on the payday lending industry are “stronger than almost any other state.”

PolitiFact Florida rated that claim False.

The race for the open Florida Senate seat is heating up. If you want to see Washington continue down the road that puts the corruption of characters like Mitch McConnell, Harry Reid, Paul Ryan, Chuck Schumer, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, and Donald "I Buy Politicians" Trump in power, you must vote for Patrick Murphy. If this kind of thing revolts you and makes you think government is the enemy, consider supporting a proven and effective reformer, Alan Grayson. You can contribute to him-- as well as to Tim Canova-- by clicking on this thermometer:

Maine And Florida Democratic Party Pathos... I Mean Bathos

Paul didn't have time for his makeup before the shoot

If really stupid and extremist teabaggers like Paul LePage (R-ME) and really corrupt and extremist teabaggers like Marco Rubio (R-FL) don't have quite the heft it takes to win high office on their own... well, that's what the Democratic Party is for. LePage, who has an ugly 51% disapproval rating, is about to be elected governor of Maine. And Rubio, with too many financial impropriety scandals to mention, can use those drapes fellow crackpot Joe Miller was too quick to measure in the Senate office building. Three-way races propelled each to a position where there's little that can stop them now. Keep in mind that in 2008 Obama won both states, Maine with a very solid 58% and Florida with a tighter, but more startling 51%.

Since few outside of Maine are following that race, let's start there. The Democrat state Senate President Libby Mitchell, is well-liked inside the political establishment but has run for so many thing so many times that voters seem tired of her. 56% of Mainers polled by PPP say they disapprove of her (an even worse ranking than LePage's). But compared to her, the part time mayor of Waterville [pop. 15,605] and the General Manager of Marden's Surplus and Salvage, is a fresh face-- even if he is a crank and a threat to much of what Mainers hold dear (outside of crankdom itself). The fact that the best-liked of the candidates is an independent, Eliot Cutler, makes it impossible for Mitchell to find a path to victory.

What's most remarkable about LePage's likely victory is that it comes despite the fact that a majority of Maine voters don't like him. 51% of them have an unfavorable opinion of him to only 42% who see him in a positive light. But because he has a relatively unified conservative base while Democratic leaning voters are splitting almost evenly between Mitchell and Cutler he's in a position to win without coming anywhere close to 50% of the vote.

LePage is winning Republicans, who because of the enthusiasm gap are actually the largest group of voters in Maine this year, by a 71-18 margin. Mitchell is pretty much out of contention at this point because she is barely taking even a majority of Democratic voters, holding a 51-30 advantage over Cutler. Cutler meanwhile has the advantage with independents at 40% to 31% for LePage and with Mitchell registering at only 17%.

There's one way to keep LePage from winning and, if he can, ruining the state. Mitchell would have to step aside and endorse Cutler. If she would, it's likely he'd win. But she won't. There's a similar situation in Florida. In fact, people have been not sending in early ballots in anticipation of either Charlie Crist or Kendrick Meek dropping out to stop Rubio. Apparently that ain't happening either. The latest polling in the Florida race for the open Senate seat shows Rubio with a 42% plurality to 35% for Crist and 15% for Meek.

First a little background: Dan Gelber was muscled out of the race to make room for the highly unaccomplished Kendrick Meek's sake. Why, when Gelber would certainly be an A+ as a senator while Meek struggled between a D and a C? The thinking was that no one really expected Meek to win but there was the hope he would inspire lots and lots of energetic "Obama voters" for Alex Sink and other Florida Democrats. I'm sure she must have almost had a heart attack if the most unreliable reporter at Politico happens to have his facts right (for a change) and Clinton really did nearly talk Meek into dropping out and endorsing Crist.

Personal experience has shown me that Ben Smith is a ridiculous and credulous excuse for a reporter who can be effortlessly drawn into anyone's personal agenda. But he's asserting that the White was aware that Clinton was persuading Meek to endorse Crist and that Meek actually agreed... twice!

Meek, a staunch Clinton ally from Miami, has failed to broaden his appeal around the state and is mired in third place in most public polls, with a survey today showing him with just 15 percent of the vote. His withdrawal, polls suggest, would throw core Democratic voters to the moderate governor, rocking a complicated three-way contest and likely throwing the election to Crist.

The former president’s top aide, Doug Band, initially served as the intermediary between Meek and Crist, and Clinton became involved only when Meek signaled that he would seriously consider the option, Clinton spokesman Matt McKenna confirmed to Politico.

“The argument was: ‘You can be a hero here. You can stop him, you can change this race in one swoop,’” said another Democrat familiar with the conversations, who said Clinton had bluntly told Meek that he couldn’t win the race.

Democrats really should just try to pick the best candidates and stop with the fancy strategies. They're really bad at it. And now we'll have Marco Rubio to deal with for God-knows-how-long... even if Florida does wind up with a governor wearing a blue t-shirt... whoopie!

Why I'd Still Hold My Nose And Vote For Meek

Kendrick Meek is far from my idea of a good candidate. The Florida Democratic braintrust picked him not to win but to turn out the African-American base for other Democrats up and down the ticket. I hope their gamble pays off and no one pays too much attention to what a weak and corrupt figure Meek is and how unworthy he is to have ever gone beyond the state legislature.

So I'm joining Howard Dean in supporting Charlie Crist now, right? No, wrong. First of all, that whole Howard Dean thing was just some silliness pushed out through never reliable right-wing propaganda channels. And second, no matter how bad Meek will be as a senator, he'll always be much better than Charlie Crist.

As a Brookings study released earlier today showed: "In both the House and the Senate, the most conservative Democrat is more liberal than is the most liberal Republican." Judging by their respective records, Crist is unlikely to be the most liberal Republican and Meek, though not a leader, will be far from the most conservative Democrat. He may not be my idea of a decent Rep for a rock-solid Democratic congressional district-- and he's almost as sleazy as his mentor Debbie Wasserman Schultz-- but he's never going to be like Blanche Lincoln or Ben Nelson or Evan Bayh. He's basically a moderate who does what he's told. And Crist is a deceitful-- let's face it, by their nature all closet queens are instinctually-- and opportunistic hack.

Even before the announcement today, Crist's campaign started giving "partial refunds" to angry Republican donors. (Cornyn wants his money back too; I bet he wishes he had never persuaded Crist to run, let alone crowned him the GOP candidate.) This morning Chris Cillizza asked the question I've been tweeting for two weeks:

Which side will he caucus with if elected?: Crist is almost certain to deflect this question, which will be asked of him repeatedly if he goes independent. But, his side-stepping won't stop it from being asked until it's answered. While a governor can get away with avoiding party labels-- the essence of the job is competency and accomplishments not partisanship-- a Senator simply cannot. Federal races are, by their very nature, far more partisan affairs and it's impossible for any candidate to avoid answering the question of which side they will caucus with if they get elected. Crist will undoubtedly cast his decision as a sort of "pox on both your houses" choice but, at the end of the day, there is no independent caucus. (The two elected independents-- Sens. Joe Lieberman of Connecticut and Bernie Sanders of Vermont both caucus with Democrats.) Crist is almost certain to have to choose a side and, in so doing, runs the risk of losing votes-- no matter which side he picks.

Cillizza was writing in the context of winning the race. I was tweeting away furiously in the context of what Senator Crist would do in regard to actually caucusing. Could he really ever do anything else other than revert to habit and pop back out of the closet as a 100% bona fide Republican, albeit a sometimes slightly moderate one (relatively speaking)? I don't think so-- which is why I'd vote for Meek, no matter how distasteful that choice is.

The idea of Charlie Crist running against the system is a bit bizarre but he did make his announcement-- late, which for Crist is anything but bizarre-- and he said, "Our political system is broken... I believe in democracy and the right to choose." Most of the framing so far is that he's an opportunist and this is all about "me, me, me." Well, he's a politician, so that isn't saying much.

Candidates' Reactions On Tough Issues Tell You What Kind Of A Senator They Are Likely To Be-- Kendrick Meek And Jennifer Brunner

Senators need to be leaders, not followers

Funny, how different candidates for the Senate react when the rubber meets the road. When Kendrick Meek, who no one has ever accused of having a courageous bone in his body, was worrying that progressive Dan Gelber could give him trouble in the Florida Senate primary, he was inching left. Uncharacteristically, he voted against the war supplemental. (When's the last time Kendrick Meek has ever not voted with his mentor Debbie Wasserman Schultz on anything?) Now that Gelber is running for Attorney General, Meek was the first weak link to jump off the anti-war bandwagon. As soon as Rahm Emanuel started barking, candidate Meek abandoned any pretense of principle. He's now a firmly committed "yes." Or am I wrong? Is it possible that he likes the idea of a $108 billion bailout for European banks through the IMF that was added onto to the bill since he voted no? Is that why he changed his vote-- because he thinks Florida voters want their tax dollars going to bail out European banksters?

Doesn't Florida have one of the hardest hit economic situations in the country? That was rhetorical; it does. How is Meek going to hope to go up against Charlie Crist or Marco Rubio, whose policies helped acerbate the economic downturn in Florida, if he looks like the candidate supporting bailouts for foreign banks? Rubio's going to eat him alive.

Meanwhile, Ohio's Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner (also a Senate candidate) studied the IMF proposal and issued this press release today.

Brunner Urges Congress to Reject IMF Bailout
Candidate Says Government Should Not Use Taxpayer Dollars to Bail Out European Banks


COLUMBUS -- Ohio Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner today called on the U.S. Senate to reject the Obama Administration’s request for $108 billion in bailout funds for the International Monetary Fund (IMF).

“Many of the European banks made a series of risky and speculative loans in central and eastern Europe that are likely to go into default,” Brunner said. “We are looking conservatively at more than a trillion dollars in bad loans, loans that the United States had no part in, and we simply cannot afford to step in now and bail them out through the IMF. We have too many families and our own institutions struggling here at home who need our help first.”

Some have argued that the money is necessary to help provide a global stimulus and to help people in poverty in countries with poorer and less sophisticated economies. But the actual amount of money that will go to assist these countries is indirect and minute. Most of the money would aid struggling European banks that are facing potential losses in the hundreds of billions of dollars. That money would be sent via the IMF, which, unlike TARP funds, would not be subject to any semblance of oversight of or accountability to the U.S. Congress.

“American taxpayers are weary of business bailouts, especially ones that do not help create American jobs,” Brunner added. “And as we speak, some American banks are chafing at the regulations placed on them by the latest in bailout funding and want to repay it quickly to have a say in their own operation and to attract the best talent to their operations. Bailing out European banks through the IMF, without even the minimal regulations placed on American banks, only increases the potential for a wider imbalance in trade, giving away American wealth and self-sufficiency, and jeopardizing not only our economy but our traditional sense of American self-determination. Before aiding foreign banks, Congress must demand a thorough auditing of the Federal Reserve by the Government Accounting Office. We must protect our American tax dollars and ultimately the wealth of our country for now and for future generations. No bailouts without transparency and accountability,” stated Brunner.

Brunner also criticized the idea of putting American taxpayers deeper in debt. “We have had to borrow money from other nations to bail out our own financial institutions. In our current delicate situation, we should not borrow to lend and perpetuate the ‘house of cards’ that put us here in the first place. Nor should we burden our children and grandchildren with more debt and higher deficits to let European financial institutions off the hook with no consequence and with potential further deepening of our existing trade deficits with other nations,” Brunner said. “Russia, China, Brazil and India are not giving any money to the IMF. Nor should we.”

Brunner has been endorsed by national and local labor unions for her commitment to labor issues and working families. She is currently running in the May 2010 Democratic primary for U.S. Senate to replace retiring Senator Voinovich.

She's also been endorsed by DownWIthTyranny. Does Emanuel really think that anyone in America wants to see billions and billions of dollars that are needed at home-- desperately needed at home-- going to bail out European bankers who took foolish and irresponsible risks? We should demand that our elected representatives care.

Dan Gelber Drops Out Of The Florida Senate Race

Wasserman Schultz announcing last year that she and her puppet would not be supporting Miami-Dade Dems against Cuban congressional fascists

It looks like there won't be a progressive in the race for Florida's open Senate seat after all. At tonight's Jefferson Jackson Dinner state Senator Dan Gelber withdrew, presumably to run for Attorney General. That leaves a corrupt Democratic Party hack with virtually no chance to win, Kendrick Meek, as the de facto opponent to either Charlie Crist or Marco Rubio. Two weeks ago in the Orlando Sentinel Scott Maxwell predicted that in the end it would be a race between Meek and Crist. He never thought Gelber had any chance.

The folks in Tallahassee seem to love him-- the media, his fellow Dems, even Republicans who respect the way he plays the game.

Gelber's biggest problem is that regular folks are sick of the game altogether.

Gelber may be smart and quick-witted. But in the minds of most, he's still just another Tallahassee politician. And those guys are a dime a dozen. (And that's when you're paying the sticker price.)

Another startlingly mediocre Democratic House member, Corrine Brown of Jacksonville, is also making noises about running for the Senate seat. It's unlikely she'll make the jump though. Meek has wrapped up all the Inside the Beltway support and has raised a fortune. What a tragedy!


UPDATE: Letter From Dan

Dan Gelber sent a letter to supporters this morning explaining his decision and hinting at his future plans:

As you may know I have decided to step back from my U.S. Senate bid. I wanted to let you know the reasons.

When Governor Crist announced he would be a candidate for US Senate, he created a domino effect that opened up every seat on the cabinet. At a time when our state is facing its greatest challenges, ironically, we have our greatest uncertainty and dislocation. But I believe this is also an opportunity-– the chance to set a new course that avoids the mistakes of the past and tracks a better future for our families.

It makes little sense-- when we do face the prospect of real change in Florida-- for me to participate in a potentially divisive primary for U.S. Senate that will only serve to diminish our chances against a very formidable and well-known Republican nominee.

I also believe that we have a historic opportunity here in Florida to reshape the political landscape and more importantly, bring fundamental change to Tallahassee. I have had a number of conversations with Senators Graham and Nelson, and CFO Alex Sink, about how we can best unify our party and move forward with a slate of candidates that can communicate our vision for a better Florida, and I look forward to continuing these discussions.

Leaders? Pick One: Amy Klobuchar, Kendrick Meek, Jan Schakowsky

No leaders in this snapshot

An old friend, a very wise one, told me that if I expect leadership from politicians I'm bound to be very disappointed. They follow. Usually they follow which way the wind is blowing. The better ones follow actual leaders. Earlier today I wanted to see if momentum is starting to build towards recalling Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty, who is using his state's Senate seat as a hostage of national Republican obstructionism. Wednesday Public Policy Polling had reported that 63% of Minnesota voters think Coleman lost the race and should concede. 59% believe Pawlenty should certify Al Franken's election so that he can be seated immediately. (60% of Minnesota voters think Obama has done a good job and 30% don't. In November Obama won the state with 54%.)

And yesterday I saw that they released another poll. What I was looking for was Pawlenty's job approval. As I expected, it was dismal. Only 46% of Minnesota voters think he's doing a good job; 40% disapprove. If the state Supreme Court rules, as expected, that Coleman lost, and Pawlenty still refuses to sign the election certificate, he could, in my estimation, lose a recall initiative. That's what I was looking for. But then a saw another number.

It doesn't surprise me that freshman Senator Amy Klobuchar has a high approval rating. She seems to work hard, especially now that she's handling constituent services for two senators, and she has been a moderate backer of much of Obama's agenda for change. But her approval rating was remarkable-- 62%. "That’s the best PPP has found for any of the 18 Senators it’s taken approval ratings of across the country over the last year. " By way of comparison, approval ratings for three senators up for re-election in 2010:

Richard Burr (R-NC)- 35%
Jim Bunning (R-KY)- 28%
Blanche Lincoln (D-AR)- 45%

So why is Klobuchar soaring? She certainly hasn't distinguished herself as a great leader or innovative thinker or even a partisan hero. She's just a quiet middle-of-the-pack freshman who doesn't make any trouble and tends to her constituents in a conscientious way. You don't see brilliant policy proposals coming from her the way you expect from Bernie Sanders or Dick Durbin or Russ Feingold or Tom Harkin.

Let's take an entirely different example. No one would ever accuse Florida Congressman Kendrick Meek of showing any leadership in any area other than in currying favor with lobbyists. He's a definition of a mindless rubber stamp, a go-along-to-get-along hack. Most observers have also noticed that his ethics are abysmal, if not criminal. And yet, he's the favorite candidate of national Democratic insiders for the Florida Senate nomination-- this despite the fact that he's never been tested and wouldn't win a statewide race against even the worst of the possible GOP candidates. He has something far more valued than leadership; he does what he's told and doesn't ask why. Like Klobuchar, Meek is "nice." That's a far more valued commodity. (By the way, although both are moderates, I'm not trying to lump Klobuchar in with Meek. He's a pitiful hack; she's a solid public servant. And she isn't corrupt.)

Rather than leaders we're used to seeing useless hacks and shills like Bernie Thompson (D-MS) grandstanding and playing up to yahoos and wealthy campaign donors, the way he just did over the release of the Department of Homeland Security document warning of possible dangers of terrorism on the far right (like in the case of the Oklahoma City bombing).

If you were looking for Democratic elected leaders to publicly stand up against the manipulated Know Nothing teabagger parties yesterday, you would have been sorely disappointed. I can't say I checked every single congressional website, although I checked many. I get press releases from dozens of members of Congress. I read a lot too-- and widely. But I've only found one Democratic leader willing to stand up and criticize the faux grassroots teabaggery: Jan Schakowsky, who, correctly rated them despicable. Like secessionist loon Rick Perry (R-TX), many far right Republicans, of course, are trying to embrace the teabaggery.

"The ‘tea parties’ being held today by groups of right-wing activists, and fueled by FOX News Channel, are an effort to mislead the public about the Obama economic plan that cuts taxes for 95 percent of Americans and creates 3.5 million jobs," Schakowsky said in a statement.

"It’s despicable that right-wing Republicans would attempt to cheapen a significant, honorable moment of American history with a shameful political stunt," she added. "Not a single American household or business will be taxed at a higher rate this year. Made to look like a grassroots uprising, this is an Obama bashing party promoted by corporate interests, as well as Republican lobbyists and politicians.”

She's running for the U.S. Senate too. If her voting record in the House is any indication-- and she's currently the #4 best out of 435 members-- and if her leadership capacity is something you think is a positive, you'll probably agree that she'd make a great addition.

Big Lobbyist Pay-Day For Kendrick Meek

Will they be working for the same special interests in the Senate?

When Kendrick Meek (D-FL) got caught taking legalized bribes from a Boston developer working on a shady project in his south Florida district, he had no trouble vowing to donate the money to charity. Afterall, since Meek first took over his mother's congressional seat in a sneaky maneuver that precluded any opposition, in 2002 he's sucked up over $3.5 million, about half of it from PACs and an immense amount from special interest groups. The sector "donating" the most has been the most corrupt of all, the financial/insurance/real estate sector (nearly half a million dollars!), although Big Pharma, AgriBusiness, Tobacco and assorted lobbysists recognize an easy touch when they see one and together have lavished over a million dollars on his easy campaigns. Easy? He's never had an opponent; that easy.

The $5,500 is peanuts for Meek, who raised more than $1 million for his lightly contested 2006 reelection campaign. And he denied that the $5,500 in contributions influenced his actions in any way. But his decision to give away the cash demonstrates Meek’s concerns about his connections to the project and to Dennis Stackhouse of Boston, who along with his wife accounted for $5,000 of the sum.

Meek’s decision to donate the money comes in the wake of local media reports questioning the financing and stewardship of the project.

It gets worse:

[Kendrick's mom and predecessor] U.S. Rep. Carrie Meek, who has a street named after her just blocks from the proposed park, received at least $40,000 from one of Stackhouse's companies, a leased Cadillac Escalade and a 2,600-square-foot office for her foundation, rent-free.

But the money just rolls in-- and Meek maintains a passably mediocre voting record for someone in a strongly Democratic district, helping out special interests and ignoring working families whenever he feels he can get away with it. This year ProgressivePunch has him at an 80 out of 100, a distinctly non-progressive record. And his corruption is barely noticed by anyone-- either that or people have such low expectations from politicians that they think there is nothing better to expect.

Washington lobbyists, on the other hand, know exactly what to expect from Meek-- and they love him. Just last year lobbyists donated $30,000 to Meek's "campaign" (another one with no opponent). And last night some of DC's most disreputable and sleazy lobbyists hosted a gala fundraiser for him ($1,000/head) at Current, the sushi bar at 1215 Connecticut Avenue, Inside-the-Beltway, of course. We weren't able to find out how much loot Meek hauled in but judging by the list of pirates throwing the bash, it's probably a six figure number. Among Meek's pals are a rogues' gallery of DC Establishment corruptionists. Abramoff is in prison but look at this repulsive list of competitors for his title as DC's king of sleaze:

Kimberly Woodward, a lobbyist for WalMart;
Angela Riemer, a lobbyist for Wyeth;
Darlene Richeson, owner of Darlene Richeson & Associates, a very suspect Telecomm and Health Issues Lobbying firm that seems to specialize in getting African-American Democrats like Al Wynn and David Scott to vote for corporate initiatives generally supported by Republicans;
Chaka Burgess, a lobbyist for Amgen who seems to favor easily corruptible Blue Dogs like Jason Altmire, Brad Ellsworth and Heath Shuler;
Joyce Brayboy, a lobbyist at the Glover Park Group who's job is to round up African-American votes for their sleazy and predatory clients (Verizon, Visa Card, Pfizer, and Pizza Hut);
Engel Burns, another Big Pharma lobbyist, this one from Sepracor;
Isaac Fordjour, and another "health" lobbyist, this one a partner in Tarplin Downs & Young;
Lauryl Jackson, a lobbyist for Pharmaceutical Research & Manufacturers;
Jesse Price, lobbyist for Eli Lilly
Tami Jackson, lobbyist for Dupont

A word to the wise: if Meek gets the Democratic nomination for Senate, it would probably be handing the seat to a Republican but even if he did win, it would just mean another worthless senator who looks out for the same special interests that Republicans take such good care of.

Some Unions Their Own Worst Enemy In Florida Senate Race

Meek, along with Debbie Wasserman Schultz declares he won't support Miami Democrats against Republican incumbents

I remember last year when Blue America was trying to help Georgia state Senator Regina Thomas oust reactionary Blue Dog John Barrow, we ran into some surprising difficulties. Here was a politician who has shown again and again that his sympathies are, at best, very conflicted between the special interests and the interests of working families and yet he has always counted on easily duped and somewhat politically naive organized labor to underwrite the part of his campaign that the special interests don't.

For example, in 2007 Barrow signed on as a co-sponsor of the Employee Free Choice Act and, in fact was among the 228 Democrats who voted for passage on March 1-- all but two Democrats. However, Barrow didn't totally let down his Chamber of Commerce anti-union supporters either. Just moments before the final vote, the House Republicans tried killing Employee Free Choice with a motion to recommit. Barrow and a dozen other reactionaries joined 189 Republicans in voting for that motion, which would have killed the bill. This year Barrow and most of those reactionaries, at the urging of the Chamber of Commerce and other Big Business interests, have refused to co-sponsor the exact same bill. The other anti-union Democrats who voted to recommit in 2007 and refuse to co-sponsor this year, are Dan Boren (Blue Dog-OK), Joe Donnelly (Blue Dog-IN), Brad Ellsworth (Blue Dog-IN), Baron Hill (Blue Dog-IN), Jim Marshall (Blue Dog-GA), Harry Mitchell (AZ), Collin Peterson (Blue Dog-MN), Heath Shuler (Blue Dog-NC) and Gene Taylor (Blue Dog-MS). Counting Barrow, that's just 10. What about the other 3? The other 3 Democrats who voted to kill Employee Free Choice, Tim Mahoney (Blue Dog-FL), Nick Lampson (Blue Dog-TX) and Nancy Boyda (KS), were defeated at the polls in November-- no thanks to organized labor, which cluelessly supported each of them-- $239,250 for Mahoney, $245,000 for Lampson and $193,800 for Boyda.

And last year labor unions donated $231,500 to Barrow, one of the most reactionary, anti-working family Democrats in Congress, who, although he represents a reliably Democratic district, regularly crosses the aisle on core issues to vote with the GOP. What was especially frustrating is that Regina Thomas is a staunch supporter of organized labor, not just in words but in deed. She wasn't given one thin dime by an Inside-the-Beltway labor movement thoroughly co-opted by the Democratic Party Establishment incumbent protection racket. Barrow, as well as other reactionary special interest Democrats, were also collecting money, quite openly, from one of organized labor's bitterest political enemies, far right Republican Party front group, BIPAC.

That said, it should come as absolutely no surprise at all that several big unions have lined up behind moderate and tepid Democrat Kendrick Meek, who is the very picture of a non-leader and certainly an untested quantity who has virtually no chance to wrest the Florida U.S. Senate seat being abandoned by Mel Martinez from the GOP. A scandal-plagued mediocre rubber stamp, Meek is a blue print of what the Democrats don't need more of in Congress. But he's a loyal Insider and the Beltway Establishment is rallying round the flag, regardless of the fact that there is a proven progressive leader with a real chance to actually win the seat in the race, longtime labor ally, state Senator Dan Gelber. Here's a perfectly pathetic example of organized labor shooting itself in the foot again with absolutely execrable political decision-making. Of course only Meek is the godfather of one labor leader's son. What will they do next-- start supporting Republicans against Democrats? Why not; it's not such a big step from supporting Blue Dogs and other non-progressives over progressives.

Dan Gelber Live At Crooks And Liars Today

Remember the progressive campaign slogan many bloggers used last year, "More and Better Democrats?" Somewhere along the line we stopped worrying too much about the "more"-- and allowed the DCCC to work on their own to elect Blue Dogs and reactionaries like Bobby Bright, Parker Griffith and Walt Minnick-- while we concentrated on the "better." Candidates we asked our readers to help out last year-- like Carol Shea-Porter (D-NH), Alan Grayson (D-FL), Donna Edwards (D-MD), Eric Massa (D-NY), Jared Polis (D-CO), Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Jim Himes (D-CT), Steve Cohen (D-TN), Martin Heinrich (D-NM), Hilda Solis (D-CA)-- have gone to DC and worked hard on a progressive agenda that recognizes the aspirations of working families rather than the special interests that dominate most of the Inside-the-Beltway politics-- on both sides of the aisle.

Today we're proud to have a guest at Crooks and Liars who has embodied in his political career, the whole idea of "better Democrats," Florida state Senator Dan Gelber. We first endorsed Dan in the race for the U.S. Senate seat being vacated by Mel Martinez in January. Today, please join us in the C&L comments section to meet Dan and ask him the kinds of questions that you would like answered by someone running high office. And, please, if you like what you hear, consider donating to his campaign at our ActBlue page.

Before Dan meets whatever right-wing obstructionist the Republicans use to try to hold onto the Florida seat, he'll have to win the Democratic primary. He's being opposed by a typical Inside-the-Beltway political hack, Kendrick Meek, someone who votes like he's told-- it could be worse; at least he's not a Blue Dog-- and spends his time courting lobbyists and special interests. Like Al Wynn, he was one of the Democrats who voted for the bankruptcy bill that has hurt so many working families and opposed drug importation legislation, a nice big favor to BigPharma. Meek is a pay to play Democrat and, other than arch-reactionary Allen Boyd, he's the most Chamber of Commerce-friendly Democratic congressman from Florida.

If the Inside-the-Beltway power brokers get their way and Meek wins the nomination, he is unlikely to win the general election but if he did, he'd be more dead weight in a U.S. Senate that is absolutely weighed down with dead weight. We need leaders, not followers. Meek, who in the past has taken his marching order from Debbie Wasserman Schultz-- he originally joined her in announcing they would not support the Democratic congressional candidates against their right-wing pals Ileana Ros-Lehtinen and the notorious Diaz-Balart Brothers-- is a follower, not a leader. In many ways he is the polar opposite of Dan, who, as Minority Leader of the Florida House, was the face and voice of progressive values while one Bush ruled in DC and another ruled in Tallahassee. Dan led the effort, as a second week legislator, to stop the GOP from using the state legislature to steal the 2000 presidential election; worked to protect civil liberties when the state re-wrote security laws after 9/11; took on Jeb Bush on virtually everything--becoming what the Wall Street Journal called, Bush's chief nemesis. He wrote many significant laws, including new rules on public corruption, efforts to crack down on abuse of plea-bargain laws, and passed major prescription drug pricing reform law. 

So please join us over at C&L and, if you can, remember even a $5 or $10 contribution is the backbone of allowing a grassroots campaign like Dan's able to stand up to the lobbyists and special interests that are all behind Meek.


UPDATE: KEN QUINNELL ENDORSES DAN GELBER

Ken Quinnell of the Florida Progressive Coalition endorsed Dan this afternoon.

Why Gelber? The reasons are many, but let’s start with a big first one — he’s as progressive as legislators come. Dan is a thoughtful man who actually takes the time to understand the issues and how government actions affect people in the real world. And he’s a big fan of things like logic, reason and evidence. Combining these things, he comes down on the right side of the issues about as often as anyone I can think of, particularly in the Florida legislature. Take a look at his voting record and you’ll be pleased to see such a principled, liberal record from a member of the Florida legislature. And when people hit him with the same old, tired conservative Rush Limbaugh-style attacking points, he’s prepared for them and can counter them as good, if not better, than the best pundits and bloggers out there.

The Florida Senate Seat-- Democratic Race Now Wide Open

Old foes Rubio and Gelber could face off for the governor's chair

A couple weeks ago Republican incumbent Mel Martinez, seeing clearly which way the wind is blowing-- Obama beat McCain by over 200,000 votes and two Republican congressional incumbents got kicked out on their asses-- announced he wouldn't run for re-election in 2010. Obama beat McCain among men and women and in every age groups except people over 65, the age group that is dying off the most rapidly. To hold the seat, the GOP turned to the one Republican they felt would have a real chance: Jeb Bush. He turned them down flat, admitting that right now there's something about his last name that makes voters... emotional. So now the state GOP is floundering around with a pack of far right fanatics like Rep./used car salesman Vern Buchanan, ex-Speaker/pretty face Marco Rubio, Congressman Connie Mack, and Attorney General Bill McCollum.

Until yesterday it looked like it would be a cake walk for the Democrats with the state's CFO, Alex Sink. But in the morning she announced that she's not running either. "'Over the past several weeks, I have given serious and careful thought to my own future and, more importantly, to the future of our state. And I am extremely grateful for the support and advice so many friends and fellow Floridians have shared. I believe my skills and abilities are of greatest use here in Florida, where I am honored to serve as chief financial officer. And I will run for reelection as chief financial officer to continue being a fiscal watchdog on behalf of the people of Florida.'' That means she's running for governor in 2014 when Crist steps down (unless he steps down sooner so he can run for the Senate seat, a very distinct possibility-- and probably as good a shot for the GOP as Jeb would have been.

Miami Democrat Congressman Kendrick Meek has already announced his candidacy. Meek is a moderate Democrat with a great reputation in his own district and in South Florida in general, but isn't a force statewide. Way over on the right end of the spectrum is Blue Dog sleaze bag Allen Boyd, one of the most reactionary members of Congress and a guarantee that whoever the Republicans run will have a cakewalk to election. Another moderate congressman, Ron Klein, also from South Florida, is thinking of running.

But the best prospect for progressives is State Senator Dan Gelber of Miami Beach, who was the House minority leader until this year and is well known and well respected statewide. He hasn't officially entered the race yet, but mutual friends of mine and his tell me he has already made up his mind to run now that Sink has bowed out.

Another Republican Senator Calls It Quits After Helping Bush Bring The Country To Its Knees-- Who Will Replace Voinovich?

Although George Voinovich had been elected a state representative and, in 1978, Ohio's Lt. Governor, his debut on the national scene didn't really come until he resigned as Lt. Governor after one year to run against-- and beat-- Cleveland Mayor Dennis Kucinich. Later, after a disastrous run for the U.S. Senate in 1988, Voinovich was elected Governor of Ohio. My own awareness of him came because of the tremendous support (both as mayor and governor), to the tune of $65 million, he offered the Rock 'n' Roll Hall of Fame. Since 1999 he has been a U.S. Senator and, at least in the beginning, was one of the Republicans most willing to vote with the Democrats on behalf of working families. (Right wing fanatics still haven't forgiven him.) And you may recall that he broke with the far right by refusing to back Bush's choice of extremist sociopath John Bolton as UN ambassador.

Today Voinovich announced that he would retire from the Senate after finishing his second term in 2010. Demographic and political trends, as well as recent polls, showed that he would probably lose a bid for a third term. His excuse for skipping out on the job?

"I have never seen the country in such perilous circumstances.  Not since the Great Depression and the Second World War have we been confronted with such challenges, as a nation and as a world," Voinovich said. "I must devote my full time, energy and focus to the job I was elected to do, the job in front of me, which seeking a third term-- with the money-raising and campaigning that it would require-- would not allow me to do."

OK... I hope some of his GOP colleagues come to identical conclusions, particularly obstructionist extremists like Jim DeMint (R-SC), David Diapers Vitter (LA), Judd Gregg (R-NH), Chuck Grassley (R-IA) and Tom Coburn (R-OK). But what's on everyone's mind now is who's going to be Ohio's next U.S. Senator?

There are four likely Republicans eyeing the seat: Bush's spectacularly failed Director of the Office of Management and Budget (as well as inept U.S. Trade Representative), ex-Congressman Rob Portman; John Kasich, another former Republican congressman, although he had been gearing up to run a hopeless campaign for governor; defeated ex-Senator Mike DeWine; and former vote-stealin' Secretary of State, the much-loathed Ken Blackwell. Four complete losers. The Democratic Party's most likely nominee is Lt. Governor Lee Fisher, although popular Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner, who did a decent job cleaning up after Blackwell, is also a top contender. There are also four members of Congress considering the race, 2 progressives (Betty Sutton and Mary Kaptur), a moderate (Tim Ryan) and a reactionary whose voting record looks suspiciously Republican (Zack Space). And what about Paul Hackett? [UPDATE: Paul's not interested, according to a mutual friend.]


UPDATE: SENATE "LEADERSHIP" BACKTRACKS ON BURRIS... AGAIN

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Illinois senior senator and Assistant Majority Leader Dick Durbin said in a Monday statement that the Senate would accept the credentials of Roland Burris. He should be sworn in later this week. I wonder if Reid is embarrassed. Even Oklahoma kook Jim Inhofe likes Burris! They wound up having dinner at the Monocle and afterwards Inhofe said “I was very much impressed with him. From my little, meager research, I thought, ‘This guy looks like Senate material’.”

And you know that Florida Senate seat Mel Martinez is giving up in 2010? The one Jeb isn't running for? It looks like Rep Kendrick Meek will be announcing his candidacy tomorrow.

Debbie Wasserman Schultz-- Corrupt, Bitter, Increasingly Alone And Filled With Venom

Kendrick remembers he's a Democrat and leaves DWS on her own with the Republican extremists

This morning DavidNYC at Swing State Project revisited Debbie Wasserman Schultz' determined campaign to undermine and sabotage the efforts of Miami-Dade Democrats to replace reactionary Republican extremist-- and Wasserman Schultz crony-- Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, with one of the most outstanding Democratic challengers running in this election cycle, Annette Taddeo, someone the corrupt Wasserman Schultz fears could stand in her way when she seeks higher office.

When Wasserman Schultz, co-chair of the DCCC's less and less credible "Red to Blue" program, first announced her intention to work against the election of the 3 Democrats running against her right-wing buddies-- Ros-Lehtinen plus the Diaz-Balart Brothers-- in South Florida, she suckered and bribed a more respectable south Florida Democrat, Kendrick Meek, into her scheme. Since then, pressure from the Democratic Party and from the grassroots has forced Wasserman Schultz to distance herself from the unspeakable Diaz-Balarts-- she has now allowed their opponents, Joe Garcia and Raul Martinez, into the Red to Blue program and has even given token donations to their campaigns from her PAC-- and she has been abandoned in her indefensible position by Meek who has endorsed all three candidates and donated to each as well.

In leaving Wasserman Schultz to steam in her own bile, Meek throws in with former Florida Governor and Senator Bob Graham, who sent an e-mail to every Democrat in FL-18 telling them that he's "confident that Annette Taddeo represents exactly the kind of change that our country needs" and calling her "a tough, independent-minded Democrat who will fight for the American dream. She’ll also stand up for American values, like health care for children of working families." He pointed out that Wasserman Schultz' Republican candidate, Ros-Lehtinen "voted five times against expanding KidCare in Florida. That’s five votes that Ros-Lehtinen cast with President Bush-- and against expanding health care for children, even though Florida is last in the country for children with health care coverage, and there are 250,000 uninsured children in South Florida alone." One can only hope Wasserman Schultz got one of Gov. Graham's e-mails as well. If she hasn't, you can let her know what he and other Florida Democrats think by calling her office at 202-741-7154 or 202-225-7931 and telling her to come back to the Democratic Party-- or at least resign from the DCCC Red to Blue program. 

If Wasserman Schultz backs away from her support of the extreme right (and extremely corrupt-- like DWS herself-- Ros-Lehtinen, she will be getting on board with Emily's List, United Teachers Dade, the AFL-CIO, American Federation of Government Employees, International Union of Painters and Allied Tradesman, Ironworkers Political Action League, Communications Workers of Americans, the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, Democracy for America, the two biggest netroots PACs (Blue America and Orange to Blue), as well as Democratic congressmembers who may be a little skeptical about DWS and his motives, nemesis Charlie Rangel and a growing posse of congressional Democrats sick to their stomachs over her corruption and worried that she will drag the Democratic Party down the same path that Tom DeLay dragged the GOP. Besides Meek and Senator Russ Feingold, solid progressives like Lucille Roybal-Allard, Xavier Becerra and close Pelosi ally Hilda Solis have endorsed Annette Taddeo and contributed to her campaign. Shamefully, most members of Congress will not contribute to Democrats who haven't been endorsed by the Red to Blue program and Wasserman Schultz plans to keep Annette off that until it is too late to make a difference-- the same way she managed to keep her off the stage at the Democratic National Convention today. Wasserman Schultz is on the verge of a nervous breakdown over her pigheaded unwillingness to back away from her support of Ros-Lehtinen.

IS BUSH ABOUT TO ATTACK IRAN?

Wolf Blinzter just had some clownish Republican congressman (Charles Boustany of Louisiana, a vicious warmonger and total kook) on with Kendrick Meek (D-FL) and the Repug is doing his best-- which isn't encouraging-- to parrot fallacious Republican talking points (i.e.- lies about casualties, deaths, peaceful strolls in Iraqi cities and, most absurd of all, the "unbiased" report coming from his excellency General Davis BetrayUs). You look at these two congressmen and you see an honest, intelligent young man from Florida calling for a bipartisan effort to come up with a way to start cleaning up the mess the Bush Regime has saddled the country with; and then you see this lying sack of Mitt from Louisiana just spinning and spinning so hard that even Blintzer had to point out that the Mitt was flowing out of his ears.

And while all this is going on, London's Times is reporting that Bush and Cheney are preparing their real goal: an attack on Iran.

The Pentagon has drawn up plans for massive airstrikes against 1,200 targets in Iran, designed to annihilate the Iranians’ military capability in three days, according to a national security expert.

Alexis Debat, director of terrorism and national security at the Nixon Center, said last week that US military planners were not preparing for “pinprick strikes” against Iran’s nuclear facilities. “They’re about taking out the entire Iranian military,” he said.

Debat was speaking at a meeting organised by The National Interest, a conservative foreign policy journal. He told the Sunday Times that the US military had concluded: “Whether you go for pinprick strikes or all-out military action, the reaction from the Iranians will be the same.” It was, he added, a “very legitimate strategic calculus”.

President George Bush intensified the rhetoric against Iran last week, accusing Tehran of putting the Middle East “under the shadow of a nuclear holocaust”. He warned that the US and its allies would confront Iran “before it is too late”.

One Washington source said the “temperature was rising” inside the administration. Bush was “sending a message to a number of audiences,” he said to the Iranians and to members of the United Nations security council who are trying to weaken a tough third resolution on sanctions against Iran for flouting a UN ban on uranium enrichment.

Maccabee over at Kos reports first hand knowledge about the preparations Bush is making for an illegal attack against Iran. Like many of us with friends in the military, Maccabee has a story about marines, soldiers and sailors who are very unhappy with the country's incompetent and venal leadership-- that and up to the minute preparations for a massive attack. Maccabee quoted his military source:

We are shipping in and assigning every damn Tomahawk we have in inventory. I think this is going to be massive and sudden, like thousands of targets. I believe that no American will know when it happens until after it happens. And whatever the consequences, whatever the consequences, they will have to be lived with. I am sure if my father knew I was telling someone in a news organization that we were about to launch a supposedly secret attack that it would be treason. But something inside me tells me to tell it anyway.

... I have become cynical only recently. I also don’t believe anyone will be able to stop this. Bush has become something of an Emperor. He will give the command, and cruise missiles will fly and aircraft will fly and people will die, and yet few of us here are really able to cobble together a great explanation of why this is a good idea. Of course many of us can give you the 4H Club lecture on democracy in the Mid East. But if you asked any of the flight officers whether they have a clear idea of what the goal of this strike is, your answer would sound like something out of a think tank policy paper. But it’s not like Kosovo or when we relieved the tsunami victims. There everyone could tell you in a sentence what we were here doing.

That’s what’s missing. A real sense of purpose. What’s missing is the answer to what the hell are we doing out here threatening this country with all this power? Last night in the galley, an ensign asked what right do we have to tell a sovereign nation that they can’t build a nuke. I mean the table got EF Hutton quiet. Not so much because the man was asking a question that was off culture. But that he was asking a good question. In fact, the discussion actually followed afterwards topside where someone in our group had to smoke a cigarette. The discussion was intelligent but also in lowered voices. It’s like we aren’t allowed to ask the questions that we always ask before combat. It’s almost as if the average seaman or soldier is doing all the policy work.

If Bush attacks Iran, Nancy Pelosi should be stapped to the first Tomahawk missle for taking impeachment off the table. And all the pathetic pygmies™ should be given their own Tomahawks to ride too. Then who will the Republicans run against Hillary? Well, Bill Maher has the obvious candidate for the Republican Party to run as the next George W. Bush.

A BLUE AMERICA POLICY CLARIFICATION-- BUSH DOG'S NEED NOT APPLY

In the last couple of days, in between Larry Craig's adventures in Republican Toiletland stories, we've had a few posts about the $50 billion supplemental to the supplemental. Basically Bush wants another $50 bil (on top of the outrageous $147 billion) for his war profiteering schemes in Iraq. Seventy of our kind of Democrats sent him a letter saying the only money they would vote to approve is money for a safe and speedy redeployment of our troops. Yesterday Ken did a piece on the GAO report that exposes the Bush Regime's blatant lies about how swimmingly everything is going in Iraq-- and how they are now trying to force the GAO to "edit" the report conform to Regime propaganda.

In lieu of impeachment, treason, and war crimes trials for Bush and his cronies, don't you think Congress should put their foot down now just and say no? Just "no." I know we're ready to say just no to anyone, regardless of political party, who votes yes on the Bush supplemental or on any compromise to funnel any more money into the Iraq war rathole. Of the incumbents Blue America has endorsed so far, 4 have already pledged to vote no on Bush's request for more money-- Steve Cohen (TN), who is under vicious attack from Harold Ford's rightist political machine, John Hall (NY), Jerrold Nadler (NY), and Hilda Solis (CA). I feel confident that our other incumbents, Carol Shea-Porter (NH), Patrick Murphy (PA), Tom Allen (ME), and Jerry McNerney (CA), will do likewise next week. If they don't, you still will be able to donate to their campaigns if you want to-- but not through Blue America. And the only incumbent currently scheduled for a Blue America endorsement and live session is our old friend Paul Hodes (NH) and he has already pledged to vote against any funding that isn't to bring the troops home. If I'm being too subtle here, Scarecrow has an explanation over at FDL.

Yesterday I was on the phone for a while with a campaign manager for a Democrat running for a House seat. He was speaking for himself and not his candidate. He told me that the problem in Iraq is very real and the dangers inherent to it are very grave and that the solution is not a soundbyte. All true, but not really relevant to what Congress can accomplish. The war was wrong when it was started and it is wrong now. The American presence there has always done one thing and one thing only: made a bad situation worse. There is no good answer to Iraq-- other than war crimes trials for Bush and Cheney, et al-- but there is one thing that must change and must change as fast as possible (tomorrow, next week, a month?) and that is the presence of American troops in Iraq.

Even a hack and tool like Ellen Tauscher (D-CA) recognizes the Bush Regime Greed Zone congressional dog and pony show for what it is. Not a word that comes out of Bush's mouth or the mouths of any of his cronies can be believed under any circumstances whatsoever-- which is why he should have been impeached and why an increasing number of people are seeing Nancy Pelosi as complicit in the Regime's crimes. Now Inside the Beltway war criminals are calling for the ouster of Bush's favored, hand-picked (not legitimately elected) Iraqi puppet, Nouri al-Maliki. Will he be the next Ngo Dinh Diem?

This morning's NY Times has three unrelated stories which should make every American furious enough to demand we get the hell out of Iraq-- a story about us re-doing the disaster known as the Iraqi police force; another in the endless tales of Bush crony corporate corruption in Iraq; and a thought piece on how the gulf between Sunnis and Shi'a has widened since Bush-- who had never heard of either before deciding to take over the joint-- came on the scene and destroyed civil society. These all point to what the cowardly Colin Powell told Bush before the invasion he supported (even if only reluctantly). Powell mixed up his duty to the citizens of the United States of America with his loyalty to the madman who had stolen the 2000 election and was determined to make a name for himself. By telling Bush that if he "broke" Iraq he would "own" it-- a concept that was certainly too abstract for a functional imbecile like Bush to understand-- Powell may have thought he had done his duty. He thought wrong.

There was one Iraq story in the Times that I absolutely loved. An airplane carrying right wing warmongers Mel Martinez (R-FL), Richard Shelby (R-AL), James Inhofe (R-OK) and Bud Cramer (D-AL) was shot at taking off from Baghdad and forced to take evasive maneuvers. These are 3 rubber stamp Republican senators and a Bush Dog, all 4 of whom very much deserving to be charged as enablers in Bush's war crimes. Of course, in something like this "almost" doesn't count.


UPDATE: KENDRICK MEEK COMES BACK FROM IRAQ READY TO JUST SAY NO

Congressman Kendrick Meek (D-FL) just came back from Iraq with a very different impression than Brian Baird. Baird, Jason Altmire and other Bush Dogs may happily go along with the regime's odious agenda, but Meek makes it clear that he has a more thoughtful-- and more sensible-- position.




UPDATE: VOTERS IN NORTHEAST MASSACHUSETTS CONSIDER DIFFERENT APPROACHES TO WAR FUNDING

The Blue America-endorsed candidate in next Tuesday's MA-05 primary, Jamie Eldridge opposes any more funding to escalate Bush's war agenda and only supports spending money to safely and redeploy our troops out of Iraq. Eileen Donoghue has essentially the same approach. James Miceli has the extreme Bush Dog point of view: let's see what General BetrayUs has to say. Front-runner Niki Tsongas, the one with the name recognition because of her former husband, the senator, also seems to be running with the Bush Dog crowd, as does Barry Finegold. If you'd like to express an interest in ending Bush's Iraq agenda, you can consider donating to Jamie's campaign.