Beyond The Phony Battle Over The Bush Tax Cuts

Despite the insanity on GOP talk shows that dominate the airwaves (like the one above), a new Quinnipiac poll shows Obama with a 53-40% job approval rating, his best in three years. "And by a wider 53 - 36 percent they trust the president and Democrats more than Republicans to avoid the 'Fiscal Cliff'... By a huge 67 - 23 percent margin, voters oppose eliminating the home mortgage interest deduction, but strongly favor, 62 - 28 percent, limiting the deduction to the first $500,000 of mortgage debt. By 56 - 35 percent, voters favor eliminating that deduction for second homes. Voters 65 - 31 percent support higher taxes on households making more than $250,000 per year, with 84 - 14 percent support from Democrats and 66 - 31 percent support from independent voters. Republicans are opposed 53 - 41 percent." (And on top of all that registered voters surveyed say they believe Obama and congressional Democrats will make "a good faith effort to cooperate with congressional Republicans" while by a 51-43% majority, voters say Boehner and Miss McConnell "will not act in good faith."

There's also a plurality of voters who would like to see the tax on capital gains rise, something the GOP is apoplectic about. Instead the Republicans want to cut Medicaid spending, which 70% of voters oppose and only 25% support. and even the GOP's polling form, Rasmussen, is reporting a gigantic preference among voters for congressional Democrats over Republicans-- an eleven point lead, the kind of lead that could even overcome the precisely gerrymandered GOP reelection strategies in Ohio, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, North Carolina and Michigan. Rasmussen says it found that "47% of likely U.S. Voters would vote for the Democrat in their district’s congressional race if the election were held today, while 36% would choose the Republican instead." And, Jim DeMint won't be in the Senate starting in January, having taken a job that pays over a million dollars a year at a think tank he hopes to make relevant to normal people outside Wingnutia.

So why ask anyone to look at all these polling numbers the first thing in the morning? Well, Wednesday I was on a conference call hosted by Rep. Xavier Becerra and Americans For Tax Fairness that discussed the Democrats strategy to win the Grand Bargain battle and, once again, it occurred to me that "our" side was fighting on a battlefield chosen precisely by our mortal enemies. Republicans should be begging Obama to not raise the margin tax rates to Eisenhower era rates-- when top earners paid 91% on the millions they made and the whole concept of sociopathic-criminal plutocracy was a structural impossibility in America. Instead, we're being prepared for Democrats bartering away pieces of Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid in return for... for what? The temporary Bush tax cuts that are due to expire on December 31 anyway?

Why isn't the national discussion about hiking the estate tax? Why isn't it about ending the cap on the Social Security tax and on really growth-positive moves like lowering the age of retirement and expanding Medicare so that everyone is in the pool? Why isn't the discussion about taxing allincome equally, both what people make from working and what they get from clipping coupons? How about that Wall Street transaction tax and a tax to make hedge fund predators pay their fair share like everyone else? Obama a socialist? I don't think so. The Democrats might be a little better-- as a party-- than the Republicans but, like when Obama says the rich should paid "a little" more in taxes-- the phrase "a little" better is the key to compared the Democrats and the Republicans. Look, even criminal fascists like Sheldon Adelson and the Koch brothers are fine with gay marriage and abortions. What they want from the politicians they buy is an economic system that privileges that already privileged and minimizes social mobility, democracy and anything smacking of economic fairness.

If you sometimes wonder why Blue America fights as hard against ConservaDems as we do against Republicans, just consider Louisiana Democrat Mary Landrieu, whose Senate seat is up in 2014. Right now she's vowing to wreck the whole Grand Bargain unless she gets her way on Estate Taxes-- lowering them for the very wealthy folks who have underwritten her-- and her family's-- political careers. Once, the twenty wealthiest families in America were forced to depend on Jon Kyl (R-AZ) to protect dynasty building; now they have someone in the heart of the action inside the Democratic Senate caucus fighting their battle for them, even more effectively than the clownish Kyl. Will there be a Blanche Lincoln-style primary against Landrieu? Or one against Mark Pryor (D-AR) who's at least as bad? Of course not... don't be silly.

Kirsten Gillibrand Stood Up To The Right Wing Scam Artists Who Targeted ACORN And Landrieu

Scam artist James O'Keefe III with would be hooker Hannah Giles

You've no doubt heard about how the Fox/Republican ACORN scam blew up in their faces today. DWT readers saw the joke in real time, last September when James O'Keefe and his crack team pulled one over on people who love to have something pulled over on them-- especially when it makes progressives look as bad as they are themselves and they imagine everyone else is as well.

Back then Senator Mike Johanns and his right-wing colleagues couldn't wait to jump all over ACORN and smear them with all that Glenn Beck nonsense that so fascinated the mainstream media for a week or three. In fact, on September 14, Johanns' amendment, S.Amdt 2355, "prohibiting use of funds to fund the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) passed 83-7, craven disgraces to the Democratic Party like Evan Bayh, Blanche Lincoln, Arlen Specter, Ben Nelson, Dianne Feinstein, Claire McCaskill rushing to buy into the trumped up demands of the far right as fast and loudly as they could. At that time only seven out of the huge Democratic majority had the intestinal fortitude to stand up and call "bullshit" on this scam-- Roland Burris (D-IL), Bob Casey (D-PA), Dick Durbin (D-IL), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Patrick Leahy (D-VT), Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI). That was a pretty gutsy, even heroic, vote at the time-- especially for the only one of the 7 up for re-election this year (Gillibrand) and looking even better today. I wonder how Landrieu feels.

There was another amendment besides Johanns', I want to bring up, this one by lunatic fringe GOP dirtbag, Pete Olson (R-TX), which attempted to honor O'Keefe and his accomplices. Nothing ever happened with it, but Olson did manage to find 31 crazy co-sponsors to go along for the ride: Todd Akin (R-MO), Roscoe Bartlett (R-MD), Joe Barton (R-TX), Rob Bishop (R-UT), Jo Bonner (R-AL), John Boozman (R-AR), Paul Broun (R-GA), Henry Brown (R-SC), John Campbell (R-CA), John Carter (R-TX), Howard Coble (R-NC), Tom Cole (R-OK), Michael Conaway (R-TX), John Culberson (R-TX), Mary Fallin (R-OK), closet queen Trent Franks (R-AZ), Louie Gohmert (R-TX), Kay Granger (R-TX), Ralph Hall (R-TX), Jim Jordan (R-OH), Steve King (R-IA), John Kline (R-MN), Doug Lamborn (R-CO), Blaine Luetkemeyer (R-MO), Daniel Lungren (R-CA), Kenny Marchant (R-TX), cultist Joseph Pitts (R-PA), who today claimed he'd never heard of O'Keefe, Bill Posey (R-FL), Phil Roe (R-TN), Mean Jean Schmidt (R-OH), and John Shadegg (R-AZ). Lotta Texas Crazy in that lot! And how did they forget Michele Bachmann and Virginia Foxx?

Anyway, in honor of Gillibrand's foresight and brave stand, I thought I'd share a little clip from Colbert's show with you tonight:

The Colbert Report	Mon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c
Alpha Dog of the Week - Harold Ford Jr.
www.colbertnation.com
Colbert Report Full Episodes Political Humor Economy

UPDATE: The Accomplices-- 3 Conservative Activists

Media Matters introduces O'Keefe's partners in crime: all lowlife movement conservatives, Joseph Basel, Robert Flanagan (son of William Flanagan, the acting U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Louisiana), and notorious right-wing fanatic Stan Dai.

Two Terrible Choices In Louisiana-- For Both Parties!

Feh!

I always try to stay out of the intricacies of the political swamp known as Louisiana. There's no other state like it and even their election rules defy comprehension. But one thing that is relatively easy to understand this cycle is the Senate race. A corporate Democrat from the Republican wing of the Democratic Party, who votes with the GOP, on substantive matters, more than Lieberman and more than any other Democrat besides Ben Nelson and Tim Johnson, is running to retain her seat. That would be Mary Landrieu. Karl Rove was sniffing around for an opponent for her and came up with... another right-wing Democrat, John Kennedy. Kennedy switched parties a few months ago and announced he'd run as a Republican in a race that was considered the best GOP shot to take a seat from the surging Democrats. It's been all downhill for Kennedy since then.

So downhill, that Louisiana's Republican Party Chairman, Roger Villere, is in hysteria and threatening to... do something bad to all the Republicans flocking to endorse Landrieu. Today's Times Picayune says the GOP is trying to figure out how to sanction the dozens of Republican office holders who are backing Landrieu.

When high-profile elected Republicans endorse Democrats, it "sends the message that we are not united," state GOP Chairman Roger Villere said. "It confuses the Republican message. . . . We are not looking to punish people, but we don't want this to develop into a trend."

Speaking with reporters after the quarterly meeting of the party's governing body, Villere said several party leaders want to adopt a formal mechanism to censure GOP officials who break with the party's candidates. He said passing a resolution "without teeth" simply to sanction a Republican who backs a Democrat, as party leaders have in the past, "doesn't make sense."

...Several prominent Republicans -- including eight officials elected parishwide in Jefferson, St. Tammany, Plaquemines, St. John the Baptist and Lafourche parishes -- have announced support for Landrieu in the Nov. 4 contest. St. Tammany Parish Sheriff Jack Strain appears in a TV ad for Landrieu.

At least four other major GOP officials from St. Tammany, where Kennedy lives, also have backed Landrieu. Jefferson Parish Sheriff Newell Normand, another Republican, joined the pack Friday.

Villere refused to answer reporters' questions about what the sanction "with teeth" would be, but it has been noted that Guantanamo is still open and that Villere has a very close relationship with Dick Cheney.

And by the way, Landrieu's corporate pals have made sure she'll be around to continue dragging the Democratic caucus in their direction. She's raised just about $10,000,000 for this race and Kennedy's only taken in $3.8 million. Big Oil, traditionally totally biased towards Republicans, gave Landrieu $302,950 and Kennedy only $117,900. And Landrieu's third biggest "industry"-- after lawyers and Real Estate-- lobbyists (at $355,312). All the traditional GOP businesses are doling out the money for Landrieu. Keeping her at the heart of the Democratic caucus has become a real priority for them. Her campaign, meanwhile, is running ads to remind people that Kennedy supported John Kerry in 2004!

If Beltway Insider organizations like the DSCC ask you, urgently of course, to contribute money to Mary Landrieu, hang up on them. Instead donate to real Democrats like Tom Allen, Jeff Merkley, Andrew Rice, Rick Noriega, and Mark Begich. Mary Landrieu is part of the problem, part of what is wrong with Washington, not part of the solution, at least not for working families.

Republicans Have Nothing To Worry About In Louisiana Senate Race

Landrieu went to the mat for Holy Joe; he screwed her on Katrina reconstruction

Oh, it's not likely that conservative Democrat-turned Republican John Kennedy will be voting to make Mitch McConnell majority leader in January (if McConnell even survives his challenge from even more conservative quasi-Democrat Bruce Lunsford in Kentucky) but when I say "Republicans," I'm not talking about the party structure but whatever values and principles are left at the heart of it: basically an agenda of creating a national security state and of serving corporate and Big Business interests over those of consumers and working families. And by that definition, Republicans will do just fine in Louisiana (not to mention Kentucky-- which I'll try not to again today). The "news" is that Mary Landrieu, the conservative, Republican-voting, Democratic senator-- once considered the only vulnerable Democratic incumbent-- has significantly increased her lead over Rove's freshly baptized Kennedy. A new Rasmussen poll shows her ahead 53-37%, whereas last month she was only ahead 49-44%.

Landrieu's attack ads have been effective, even painting Kennedy as someone who supported... John Kerry. It's driven down his support among Republicans.

Only Tim Johnson (D-SD), Ben Nelson (D-NE) and Evan Bayh (D-IN) have voted more frequently with the GOP for the Bush agenda since 2006. Earlier today we were looking at what a tool McCain has been for Bush's drive to stuff the federal judiciary with extremist ideological hacks. Quite frequently Landrieu was undermining Democratic efforts to stop the onslaught. She voted again and again with the GOP to shut down debate on nominees. The very first vote the Senate took in 2006 would determine whether or not Bush would get to put corporate hack Sam Alito on the Supreme Court-- and Landrieu, along with others from the Republican wing of the Democratic Party, were ready to make sure that would happen. On May 25, 2005 she voted against Bush's horrific nominee, Pricilla Owen-- but not before (in fact, the day before) she voted to cut off debate, guaranteeing that Owen would win confirmation. And speaking of late May, Landrieu also joined her GOP buddies to make sure dangerous Neocon warmonger John Bolton would be confirmed as UN Ambassador, the day after Pricilla Owen got her lifetime appointment on the court. The following month it was the same pattern: Landrieu voted for cloture on the Janice Brown nomination (June 7) and then, pointlessly, against confirmation on June 8; for cloture for William Pryor on June 8 and, again pointlessly, against confirmation on June 9.

Overall, Landrieu's voting record is hard to recognize as a Democrat's and when it comes to coddling Big Business and corporate interests, it's a Republican voting record-- as it is on the environment. She habitually votes with the Republicans to allow corporations to pollute the air and the water and, while not as extreme as James Inhofe (R-OK), her record shows she doesn't support steps to combat climate change.

As for the charges that Landrieu is a corporate hack, she is clearly in the pocket of Big Oil and Big Pharma. Not counting presidential candidates, Landrieu is the Democrat Big Oil gives the most money to ($189,350 this year and $616,744 since she took office). Big Pharma has "donated" $157,953,159 to federal candidates since 1990, 65% of it to Republicans-- but Mary Landrieu is right up there among their favorites along with corrupt senators who routinely sell out the interests of their constituents for the bottom line of the industry-- Max Baucus (D-MT), Mitch McConnell (R-KY), Norm Coleman (R-MN), Gordon Smith (R-OR), John Cornyn (R-TX), Pat Roberts (R-KS) and John Sununu (R-NH). Great company for our Mary, huh? They schmeared her a nice $84,150 so far this year and $201,096 since she took office. This cycle she's raised over $9,000,000 so far-- with lobbyists giving $295,490 and Big Oil & Gas $251,700.

And for those wondering how she's been on the war in Iraq... well, it's all a matter of perspective. If you're name is Dick Cheney, she's your gal. On October 10 and 11 she voted with Bush and Cheney and the Republicans all 6 times to authorize the use of force (and against all the amendments offered by Democrats to moderate Bush's rush to war). Those votes alone should make any self-respecting Democrat refuse to support her. She's moderated her attitude since then, but when it comes to actually ending the war, she's still there for Bush and Cheney. Just short of a year ago, for example, she opposed Russ Feingold's amendment to redeploy American troops from Iraq, the very same day she happily voted for John Cornyn's idiotic anti-MoveOn amendment. I bet you can already guess how she voted on the FISA bill: she voted with the Republicans to grant retroactive immunity to their criminal campaign donors and then again with the Republicans to give the president the right to wiretap Americans without a warrant. The telecoms have given her $15,750 so far this year and $114,508 in total.

TOO BAD YOU VOTED WITH THE REPUBLICANS SO MUCH, MS. LANDRIEU-- YOU'RE ON YOUR OWN

Same corporatist crap, fake Dems Kennedy & Landrieu

Louisiana Senator Mary Landrieu has an absolutely horrendous voting record-- unless you're a Republican; then it's pretty reasonable. But when it comes to Democrats... except for Nebraska's pre-op Republican Ben Nelson, Landrieu is more likely than any other member of the caucus-- and that includes Lieberman-- to vote against Democrats on key substantive issues. So now she finds herself as the only Democratic incumbent in danger of losing her seat in November. According to today's Baton Rouge Advocate the Landrieu-type Democrat who Rove persuaded to go all the way, state Treasurer John Kennedy, is getting a little help from George Bush in April. Bush's fundraising trip to Baton Rouge on behalf of Kennedy's senate race begs the question if the much hated and failed president will do more harm than the cash from wealthy Republicans is worth.

Landrieu (D) said the event likely will raise $1M for Kennedy's effort to unseat her.

Bush’s visit is a strong indication that Republicans are committed to trying to knock off Landrieu, a Senate veteran elected in 1996 seeking her third, six-year term.

Senate Republicans must defend 23 seats in November, a circumstance that some political analysts said would detract financial support from Kennedy’s campaign. But the Bush fundraiser is an indication Republicans are going on the offensive when it comes to Landrieu, according to her campaign manager Jay Howser.

“The national Republican party has made it clear for over a year that the Louisiana U.S. Senate seat held by Mary Landrieu is their No. 1 target in 2008,” Howser said in an e-mail Thursday to supporters.

Howser is hoping to use the Bush visit to rally support for Landrieu as the three-month fundraising quarter comes to an end next week. Kennedy, who until seven months ago was a Democrat, was recruited to run against Landrieu by Bush’s chief political strategist, Karl Rove.

Will it work? Progressives aren't about to vote for Kennedy but how many will just sit on their hands and watch while Landrieu's own record flushes her down the toilet? She has been a stop-gap for Bush's agenda on virtually everything-- from escalting the Iraq war, pushing for retroactive immunity, packing the courts with extreme right wing partisans to his catastrophic domestic policy of redistribution of wealth upwards. She is also one of the Democrats most firmly in bed with corrupt Inside the Beltway corporate lobbyists. You wanna buy a Senate vote? There are few Democrats as easy to deal with as Mary Landrieu-- another way she's practically a Republican in all but name. She's been on the wrong side of almost every important issue since she's come to the Senate. Progressives would be better off without her, even if it means having to fight an actual Republican six years from November.

HELP BLUE AMERICA DECIDE WHAT TO DO ABOUT DEMOCRATS WHO VOTE LIKE REPUBLICANS

Mary Landrieu: Hopelessly bad instincts?

Yesterday we celebrated that the Democratic leadership in the House was able to hold nearly the whole caucus together to pass an updated FISA law stripping out Bush's absurd and venal demands for retroactive immunity. And they managed to do that even after nearly two dozen of them had written a letter to the Speaker telling her that they demanded the opportunity to go on record in favor of retroactive immunity. Only 12 Democrats voted with the Republicans and half of them did so to protest that the bill was still too weighted in favor of the Bush Regime's unconstitutional agenda.

For those of us who follow the foibles of treacherous reactionary Democrats-- the Blue Dogs and Bush Dogs-- all the names are familiar: David Boren (D-OK), Chris Carney (D-PA), Jim Cooper (D-TN), Tim Holden (D-PA), Nick Lampson (D-TX), and Heath Shuler (D-NC). Last time I checked, out of the 6 Bush Dogs who had signed the original letter to Pelosi that we were asking the community to vote on so we could target one district for an educational campaign, Carney and Shuler were coming in, respectively, #1 and #2. The 4 others fled from retroactive immunity in terror. Our experience with Blue Dogs and Blue Dogs is that when you roll up a magazine and smack them firmly in the snout and then rub said snout in their mess, they eventually learn. We were very successful in assisting our pals in the House leadership to convince some banditos to get back on the reservation when it came to S-CHIP last year. Once conservative Democrats like Leonard Boswell and Jim Marshall, who normally act as though being bipartisan means rubber stamping every diktat that comes down the pike from Pennsylvania Avenue, starting speaking in favor of the House bill, the Republicans knew the gig was up.

But what the DLC and Republicans (and most Blue Dogs) want is a bill that caves to all Bush's demands for warrantless wiretaps and retroactive immunity, basically, the shameful bill the Senate passed last month 68-29. What happens now is a conference with the Senate to hammer out a compromise. So why did almost all the Blue Dogs support the House bill today? They know it will never become law. Even if it ever managed to pass the Senate-- almost impossible-- Bush has vowed to veto it. So what happened? Sources in the House tell me that Pelosi, Hoyer and Emanuel promised the Blue Dogs that they would be on the reconciliation committee wit the Senate charged with hammering out a compromise.

The Senate bill overturns the rule of law by granting probable criminals retroactive immunity. The House bill doesn't. The Senate bill is fine with warrantless wiretaps. The House bill isn't. In the Senate 18 Democrats voted with the Republicans and Lieberman to grant retroactive immunity and to enshrine warrantless wiretaps into law. Almost none are up for re-election this year. The exceptions are Mark Pryor of Arkansas (who has no primary or general election challenger), Tim Johnson of South Dakota, Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, and, leader of the bad Democrats on this, Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia. What should our community do about this?

An article in yesterday's Hill makes it clear that reactionary Democrats running amuck isn't just a problem the blogosphere is frustrated about. The Democratic leadership has to grapple with these Blue Dogs and Bush Dogs everyday.

House Appropriations Chairman Dave Obey (D-Wis.) said Friday he canceled meetings with a New Orleans delegation because a Louisiana lawmaker had defied party leadership on a procedural vote the night before.

And he’s warning others who do the same thing that they’ll get the same treatment.

“When people are consistently hitting the red button on procedural votes, that gets to me,” Obey said in an interview.

“I announced yesterday in caucus that anybody who wants to routinely vote against the leadership on procedural grounds, don’t ask me to see their visiting firemen when they’re in town.”

It's worse in the Senate, much, much worse. Maybe we can help, though. It will be painful but let's talk about holding one really terrible Democrat in the Senate accountable in November, especially if she votes to rubber stamp retroactive immunity again (as expected). Discussion today at FDL, 11am (PT).

WILL SENATOR MARY LANDRIEU (D-LA) OFFICIALLY JOIN THE GOP-- OR THE CONNECTICUT FOR LIEBERMAN PARTY?

Mary Landrieu up in Connecticut campaigning against the Democratic Party nominee

There is only one vulnerable Democratic senator up for re-election in 2008 who is considered vulnerable, Louisiana's Mary Landrieu. Landrieu's difficulties are three fold: her rubber stamp, Republican-like support for much of Bush's toxic agenda, her inability to fight effectively for Louisiana in the wake of Hurricane Katrina (partially because of being stabbed in the back by her old ally Joe Lieberman, Chairman of the Homeland Security Committee) and the loss of much of Louisiana's most loyal Democratic constituency, African-Americans who were displaced by the tragedy and abandoned.

Landrieu has the third most reactionary voting record of any Democrat in the Senate, worse than even Lieberman's. The only two Democrats who vote more frequently with the Republicans are Max Baucus and Ben Nelson. As a result, she more and more frequently finds herself in bed with Republican backers.

Yesterday's Times-Picayune says her donor list is getting redder (just as her voting record is).

When she first ran for the U.S. Senate in 1996, Mary Landrieu enjoyed the financial backing of abortion rights groups, environmentalists and national liberal-leaning organizations eager to keep a Democratic foothold in what was quickly becoming the Republican South.

As she gears up to run for a third term next year, Landrieu has been financially abandoned by some of those early supporters as she has moved steadily and purposefully to the ideological center [they actually mean the extreme ideological right of the Democratic Party but they are victims of Roger Ailes and Rupert Murdoch] as a means of political survival. She has found, however, that especially in a closely divided Senate, it can be quite profitable occupying the middle of the road.

She collects from all sides-- labor, corporations, trial lawyers and business executives, mostly because the unions and trial lawyers are too political lame to understand she's their enemy. Since the Democratic takeover of the Congress right-wing donors find reactionary Democrats like Landrieu the perfect investment. She has no scruples whatsoever and no loyalty to any Democratic or progressive values, so her ass is always for sale to the highest bidder. Her voting record reflects it.

The profile of Landrieu's donor list has shifted dramatically since her first campaign in 1996. Back then, EMILY's List, the San Francisco-based Democratic fundraising powerhouse that backs abortion-rights female Democrats, was her single biggest donor.

The group's political action committee gave Landrieu $10,000 and, through its national network of donors, steered $102,000 to her narrowly victorious campaign, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

Since then, EMILY's List hasn't given Landrieu a dime. In 2002, EMILY's List cut off Landrieu because of her vote to limit a controversial late-term abortion procedure.

Landrieu has likewise seen a slippage of financial support from other liberal-leaning donors such as the National Abortion Rights Action League, the National Organization for Women and the Sierra Club as she has moved rightward and established herself as a business-friendly, moderate senator who is consistently ranked among the most conservative Democrats in the chamber.

The Sierra Group and other environmentalists have been dismayed by her utterly Republican voting record on their issues and they have abandoned her. Her response? "Losing the support of liberals helps Landrieu politically as she woos conservative voters in Louisiana. Her pro-business stands have also paid financial dividends."

Unions are too slow to be effective political players and they still finance her despite her record of consistently voting against their interests. They are still huge donors to her campaign but she gets far more from corporate power players-- and she is far more responsive to their demands. Big Energy, Big Pharma, Big Finance, lobbyists representing communications, anti-health care, oil companies, are who keep her campaign humming and who she pays attention to when it's time to vote.

EXCELLENT TARGETING FROM THE DSCC. CAN I SUGGEST SOME ADDITIONS?

Tomorrow the DSCC will target 4 vulnerable Republican rubber stamps with an ad buy in their home states geared towards stoking the anger over GOP obstructionism on Iraq. This is perfect for Miss Obstructionism himself (R-KY) but it works for all four perfectly since each has an abysmal voting record on Iraq-- complete support for Bush and Cheney, no oversight, and none of that "moderate, independent voice" propaganda each is desperately trying to shield themselves with. Aside from McConnell, the ads will be aimed at Susan Collins (ME), John Sununu (NH) and Norm Coleman (MN). Including Collins is a real slap in the face for her mentor and sponsor, Joe Lieberman, whose reactionary position on Iraq she mimics.

With Bush's job approval rating rapidly headed towards the teens, it is smart of the DSCC to show how Republicans supported his agenda every step of the way and to make sure voters know he could never have done it without them. Unfortunately for the DSCC, Bush could never have done it without support from a number of Democratic incumbents as well. Let's leave out stalwart Republican collaborators like Ben and Bill Nelson, Evan Bayh, Ken Salazar, Blanche Lincoln, and Joe Biden, since none of them have to face the voters in 2008, and instead look at the voting records of Mary Landrieu (LA) and Max Baucus (MT). Not as lockstep as Collins, Coleman, McConnell, and Sununu-- but way too close.

These ads are especially dangerous for Collins, who has been successful in convincing her constituents that she's "just like Olympia Snowe" instead of just like her doppleganger, Joe Lieberman. The most salient feature of the senate race in Maine is that Collins and Rep. Tom Allen were elected on the exact same day and have been voting on the same issues. He has voted in line with what people in Maine want from their representatives and she has voted in sync with what people in Alabama, Utah and the Vice President's office want. She tries to downplay Iraq-- her latest newsletter doesn't mention the "I" word once-- and unlike Senator Snowe (R-ME), Congressman Michaud (D-ME) and Congressman Allen (D-ME), all of whom think Iraq is critical, she seems to be on the same page with Rove, that it's no biggie. Ultimately Collins will pull a Lieberman and fake opposition to the war until after the elections. It took Lieberman a matter of minutes to unreform after he was elected last year. People in Maine need only to look at the side by side voting records of Collins and Allen to see who they trust more in the U.S. Senate.

The House voted on Iraq 49 times, starting with the 4 roll calls on October 10, 2002. Rep. Allen's Iraq voting record shows he voted against the Bush-Cheney agenda 36 times, over 70% of the time. In the Senate there were 31 votes on Iraq starting the same day. Allen voted against the authorization to use force. Collins voted for it. Her voting record shows she opposed Bush 5 times (16%), although these were not substantive votes to change the Regime's agenda of endless war.

The DSCC ad for Miss McConnell:

DEMOCRATIC SWEEP SHAPING UP EVERYWHERE-- EXCEPT LOUISIANA?

Landrieu campaigning last year for Joe Lieberman. Interesting body language

People are just sick of the Republicans. They're sick of Bush and Cheney. They're sick of the GOP No-Can-Do philosophy of government. They're sick of the corruption, the lying, the killing, the bullying... It's no wonder that Bush's and Cheney's approval ratings are approaching single digits and that they're lower than anyone believed they could ever fall. Yesterday over 1,500 people showed up at Bush's lair in Kennebunkport to protest his... existence. "The large group of protesters, expressing anger over the U.S. occupation of Iraq and Russia's occupation of Chechnya, and demanding the impeachment of Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney, gathered on the village green at 1 p.m. for a rally featuring music and speakers."

A new poll out from CBS today pits a generic Democrat against a generic Republican in a presidential race. It's no surprise that the Democrat wins (with 55%). The surprise is that only 28% of Americans think there is any Republican they could vote for. They've looked at McCain, Giuliani, Romney, the rest of the 10 old white dwarves and at Freddy and it makes all but 28% want to puke. A sweep for Democrats next year? It looks that way-- an historic one at that. Even the corporate enemies of humanity, normally the most Republican of bastions, are lining up behind the Democrats Hillary. And as Matt Singer points out this morning at Left In The West even national Democrats in Montana are looking good for 2008.

Last year, not a single Democratic incumbent in federal office was defeated, anywhere. Democrats picked up more seats in the House and Senate anyone thought they could. That's a prelude to what's shaping up for next year. Interestingly, the only two Democratic incumbents with close calls last year-- reactionary Georgia Democrats who consistently vote with Republicans, Jim Marshall, in a red district, and John Barrow, in a blue district-- nearly lost because Democrats didn't want to bother to vote for two congressmen with such godawful Republican-lite voting records. Both are considered extremely vulnerable this year too.

But of all the Democrats running for re-election, the one most likely to be defeated, is Louisiana's reactionary senator, Mary Landrieu, a real Lieberman-type "Democrat." Yesterday Robert Novak, who speaks to Karl Rove, mentioned that Rove's little trip down to the Bayou State is yielding some results in the hunt for a candidate to oppose Landrieu. Louisiana has a conservative state treasurer-- conservative and ambitious-- and he's willing to jump the fence and run as a Republicans if he's promised enough money to beat Landrieu, who-- a complete and total corporate whore-- will be very well financed by the corporate interests she always champions over the rights and interests of her constituents. Landrieu is looked on as an almost sure loser next year because the Democratic Party's most loyal constituency, African-Americans, who are willing to vote for horrible Democrats like Landrieu knowing that they're still less toxic than Republicans, have been scattered all over the country due to the heinously criminal job the Bush Regime has done to rebuild New Orleans in the wake of Katrina. The Republicans are also expected to win the governor's race for the same reason.

SENATE RACES SHAPING UP WELL FOR DEMS-- MAYBE IN 18 MONTHS THEY'LL BE ABLE TO SMACK DOWN THE GOP MINORITY & NOT HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT LIEBERMAN

The Senate is shaping up to be a good playing field for Democrats next year. Like 2006, 2008 looks like it will be a bad year for rubber stamp Republicans. One extremist wingnut, Wayne Allard (R-CO) has already announced he isn't running. That seat is almost certain to be picked up by Rep. Mark Udall (D), who will face off against a far right loon, Bob Schaffer, because a mainstream conservative withdrew. Recently outed Idaho homophobe Craig Allen is also likely to forego a messy re-election bid (although in circles more polite than our own, that sort of thing is only whispered about).

A Democrat will in all likelihood beat Sununu in New Hampshire, especially if that Democrat is named former Governor Jeanne Shaheen. New Hampshire has gone very blue of late-- with both the fake moderate rubber stamp congressmen defeated by anti-war progressive Democrats, with the Democratic governor being re--elected with 73% of the vote, with the Republicans losing both houses of the state legislature, and with a slew of corrupt Republican Party officials rotting in prison. Oh, and they're rotting in prison because they helped Sununu steal the last election from Shaheen, You know the expression "dead meat?"

And speaking of fake moderate rubber stamp Republicans, it looks like Maine is ready to trade in Susan Collins for Rep. Tom Allen. Just compare the two voting records; they were first elected on the same day. His record is spectacular; hers is a disgrace.

Two other states have similar situations with fake moderates scrambling to appear independent of the Bush Regime they have been consistently rubber stamping: Oregon (Gordon Smith) and Minnesota (Norm Coleman). And then there's New Mexico, where senile Pete "Sneaky Pete" Domenici is implicated in the firing of U.S. Attorney David Iglesias, and Alaska, where senile Ted Stevens and his family are being investigated by the FBI for a multitude of corruption charges

Any bright spot for the Repugs? Well... kind of. The third most reactionary Democrat in the Senate-- who votes less frequently with the Republicans than only Ben Nelson and Max Baucus-- is Mary Landrieu of Louisiana. The Democratic caucus would be better off without her and there is little enthusiasm among grassroots Democrats to re-elect her. Business Democrats (and business Republicans, for that matter) like her. But none of the Republicans the GOP has tried to recruit want to run against her. So Rove snuck down to Louisiana a few weeks ago and tried to talk a reactionary Democrat, John Kennedy, into switching parties and running against her as a Republican. And that about sums up the GOP chances to increase their minority in the Senate.

WHY DON'T THE CONGRESSIONAL DEMOCRATS JUST END THE WAR? THEYRE THE MAJORITY, RIGHT?

Why can't the Democrats just vote to end the war? They have a majority now, right? Leaving aside the meaning of a narrow majority and what it takes to override a veto, let's look at the Democrats' big tent in regard to the war. It includes people like Barbara Boxer and Russ Feingold and Ted Kennedy and Robert Byrd on the one hand and other Democrat who are coming from an entirely different perspective. As Reid and Durbin look for the votes needed to pass even a modest bill that would ease us out of war next year-- a bill that is giving anti-war advocates fits-- he might have more luck with wavering Republicans like Chuck Hagel (R-NE), Gordon Smith (R-OR) and Susan Collins (R-ME) than with red state reactionary Democrats like Ben Nelson (D-NE) and Mark Pryor (D-AR).

Reid's office says the vote will be "very close." Senate Republican Conference Chairman Jon Kyl (R-AZ), a hard right fanatic and warmonger, said early vote counts by Minority Whip Lott had made Republicans "fairly confident" of being able to strip the language calling for withdrawal from the $121 billion-plus defense spending package.

Over the weekend Hagel-- who voted to stay the course previously-- seemed to say he's finally finished with the rubber stamp two-step he's been doing. It could be hot air-- since the senator seems confused and perpetually on the brink-- but he did say that he "will not continue supporting with my vote the status quo." That would be a first.

Pryor, who's voted with the Republicans on this in the past-- and who is up for re-election next year and apparently can't read polls that show his constituents are not satisfied with the status quo-- seems to be leaning towards supporting McConnell's position-- "stay the course"-- again. Yesterday he offered an amendment that would require the development of a classified campaign plan spelling out "strategic and operational benchmarks and redeployment dates of United States troops from Iraq as those benchmarks are met."

Ben Nelson is an even tougher nut to crack. He won't be facing the voters again for 5 years but he's a reactionary through and through and he votes more frequently with the GOP on substantive matters than he does with Democrats. To try to win over Pryor and Nelson Democrats have reworded the language to make the Aug. 31 deadline for withdrawing most combat troops from Iraq a "goal." Soon the bill will be so meaningless that Cheney would be able to vote for it.

And while the Democratic Senate majority we elected last November-- including Ben Nelson (just look at that Republican voting record)-- proves itself incapable of carrying out the popular will of the people, not just of Democrats, the base of who votes for them, but of all the people, we get an ill-times fundraising letter from the DSCC today. Did you see it?


It's called the "Nightmare Scenario." Before I opened it I wondered if it was going to be a reference to Joe Lieberman, the reactionary Bush die-hard who the DSCC conspired to re-elect last year over the Democratic nominee, Ned Lamont. No, rather than look inward at their own failings they want to blame us for the precarious situation they find themselves in now. That and ask for more money.

One seat. That's all it would take to flip Senate control back to the GOP in 2008.
And once again, Oklahoma Republican Senator James Inhofe - who has called global warming the "greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the America people -" would assume the chairmanship of the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works.
That would only be the tip of the iceberg. The very same Republicans who rubber-stamped George Bush's abuses of presidential power, who allowed military contractors to swindle American taxpayers and who looked the other way as Donald Rumsfeld's disastrous Iraq war plan unfolded would retake the reins of crucial Senate committees handling Intelligence, Armed Services and Energy.
We can't let it happen. The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC) has one mission and one mission only: to preserve and expand the Democratic Senate majority.
We're closing out our crucial first quarter of the 2008 election cycle and absolutely must get off to a strong start. This early fundraising will help us recruit the very best candidates and serve as a barometer for the talking heads to judge our early momentum.
To reach our ambitious target, we need $300,000 by midnight March 31. Our Democratic Senators know how vital this goal is and that is why they will match every single dollar you give. Can I count on you?

Count on me? To help prop up and re-elect someone like Ben Nelson? Oh, that was last year. How about Mark Pryor? If I donate to the DSCC will my money go to re-elect Mark Pryor so he can vote to extend the war in Iraq forever?

DSCC, you can count on me. You can count on me to say "Screw you, asshole!" You can count on me to contribute to any progressive Democrat who challenges any reactionary incumbent. This year the DSCC's biggest and costliest battle will be to hold on to the seat of unpopular reactionary senator Mary Landrieu whose voting record sucks-- unless you love corporate subsidies and hate the environment and think working men and women should have limited rights. And if you're with Bush on Iraq... she's your gal. DSCC, you can count on me to support-- directly-- any progressive Democrat who supports the principles and the values of the Democratic Party and who doesn't undermine them. I do it here.