REP. LUIS GUTIERREZ UN-ENDORSES LIPINSKI IN CHICAGOLAND SHOCKER

Gutierrez, moved by his better angels

Many progressives were bitterly disappointed when Congressman Luis Gutierrez went along with the powerful Daley Machine to endorse reactionary incumbent Dan Lipinski in his hotly contested bid for re-election. But, like so many politicians from Chicago, regardless of how they are on national issues-- and Gutierrez is good-- when it comes to local issues, the Machine rules. He's almost a mini version of Dick Durbin, an excellent progressive in Washington, but a pathetic hack and tool at home. So it came as quite the shock in Chicagoland politics today when Gutierrez officially withdrew his endorsement of Lipinski. But bitter disappointment from progressives didn't figure into the unprecedented action Gutierrez took today.

Gutierrez, of Puerto Rican heritage, represents Chicago's 4th CD, one of the strangest-looking gerrymanders in the country. It connects the Mexican-American communities on the Southside with the Puerto Rican communities on the Northside, while avoiding the huge Westside African-American community that seperates them (see map), resulting in an over 75% Latino congressional district-- though far more Mexican than Puerto Rican. Gutierrez had very friendly-- and beneficial-- ties with Lipinski's father and it is generally believed that his endorsement of the worthless son was a payback to the helpful father. But pressure from Mexican-Americans, in light of Lipinski Jr's aggressively anti-immigrant votes and positions, was too intense for Gutierrez to ignore.

Although the Machine has dredged up endorsements from every political hack they own, most members of Congress had managed to steer clear of this race pitting a not well-liked incumbent with a marked propensity to vote with the GOP on crucial issues against a straight-arrow progressive who many see as part of a reformed future for Chicagoland. Only Gutierrez had endorsed Lipinski and that endorsement has now gone up in smoke because Gutierrez' fierce committment to legalization for the undocumented was more important to him than the go-along-get-along political culture that comes first for lesser leaders than he is.

Like I said yesterday, the immigrant communities of Lipinski's district-- not just Latino, but Asian and Muslim as well-- have been key elements in the broad coalition backing Pera, a coalition featuring women's right's activists, pro-peace activists, environmentalists, and clean government reformers. The primary in the solidly Democratic district is this Tuesday.

PISSING OFF THE IMMIGRANT COMMUNITY IN CHICAGO HAS BEEN A VERY BAD IDEA FOR DAN LIPINSKI

click the picture to enlarge

After Democratic Party Boss Rahm Emanuel ordered Democratic House candidates to "move to the right" on immigration issues and then got one of his most subservient shills, pathetic North Carolina freshman Heath Shuler, to work with Tom Tancredo on an anti-immigrant bill, Blue America teamed up with the Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights to try to hold Emanuel accountable.

But Emanuel isn't the only anti-immigrant reactionary in Chicago. Next week one of Emanuel's puppets, Dan Lipinski, is facing the most difficult election of his life. Netroots activists and the ICIRR have also been working to make Lipinski and his Inside the Beltway backers understand that you can't expect to ride to an easy re-election by targeting immigrant communities. Like Emanueel's district, Lipinski's has a huge-- and motivated-- immigrant population. IL-03 contains some 125,000 immigrants and is home to 139,000 Latinos and 39,000 Asians. Instead of working with these communities to help integrate them into American society, Lipinski has consistently voted against the interests of these constituents. He voted for the Patriot Act, the Sensenbrenner legislation, to build the fence between the U.S. and Mexico, and for a Tancredo amendment that would cost Chicago federal funding as a "sanctuary city."

Lipinski is anti-choice, pro-corporate, pro-war, anti-stem cell... and an all-around Bush supporter, enough to attract a great deal of support from progressives around the country. The immigrant community is a big part of the Pera coalition on the ground, mostly because of his steadfast support of a humane approach to immigration reform. Several years ago, after Sensenbrenner's viciously anti-immigrant legislation, the ICIRR started a citizenship drive in Chicago and every year since then the number of citizenship applications has climbed dramatically-- from 28,000 in 2004 - 2005, to 35,000 from 2005 - 2006, to 56,000 in the past year. The ICIRR has helped over 53,000 immigrants register to vote.

The efforts immigrants rights activists is making in Asian, Mexican and Muslim communities on behalf of Mark Pera is sending a message to anti-immigrant Democrats and Republicans who have sizable immigrant populations that they can expect career difficulties for pushing hatred and bigotry instead of viable solutions.

During the current race the Mexican and Muslim immigrant leadership have formed a strong political alliance. ICIRR sponsored a voter’s forum with over 400 Mexican and Muslim immigrant leaders that was attended by Pera and another challenger, but not by their own congressman. The absence of Lipinski was heavily noted in the Spanish and ethnic language media.

And immigrant activism has gone much further. The Mexican and Muslim communities have collaborated on fundraising for the Pera Campaign, bringing in thousands of dollars locally and using the money to open a second campaign office and to hire two experienced immigrant organizers to mobilize Mexican and Muslim voters.

In addition the immigrants in the campaign have recruited Immigrants List to make this campaign a national target. An e-mail fundraising request went to over 18,000 people nationally and raised an additional $14,000 for the immigrant organizing in the Pera campaign. Finally, the national Campaign for Community Change (the 501c4 sister organization to the Center for Community Change) decided to send a first in the nation series of bi-lingual educational mail pieces, informing Latino voters in the district of Lipinski’s vote for the Sensenbrenner legislation.
Over the course of the campaign this volunteer driven immigrant field operation expects to have:

•          lit dropped 2,300 Arab households and sent an additional 2,300 a "dear neighbor" letter
•          lit dropped 7,300 latino households
•          mailed 23,000 Latinos with an immigration specific piece
•          mailed 23,000 Latino households 5 times with regular Pera literature
•          called 3,000 immigrant voters through a phone bank
•          doorknocked 5,000 immigrant voters through a canvas
• Involved over 300 Mexican and Muslim volunteers in the Pera campaign

There has never before been this type of alliance between the progressive community, the national netroots community, and the immigrant’s rights movement to punish an anti-immigrant incumbent Congressman. Lipinski is faced with a vigorous and well financed primary. The immigrant’s rights movement has organized candidate forums; educational mailings that informed the immigrant electorate of the incumbent’s anti-immigrant record; local and national fundraising; a staffed field operation with Mexican and Muslim voter i.d. and GOTV efforts; and targeted partisan mail that held the incumbent accountable for his anti-immigrant record.

For Democrats and Republicans who vote to criminalize their immigrant constituents this is a foreshadowing of what they face in the future. Lipinski would have done himself a big favor by paying attention to how his state's junior senator relates to latinos.

Pera's isn't the only crucial primary coming up in Illinois. Please consider donating to his campaign, as well as to the campaigns of Illinois progressives John Laesch and Randi Scheurer.

Dear Chicago...

WHAT TO DO ABOUT FAINTING GOATS INSIDE THE BELTWAY

An old pal from MusicForAmerica sent me this adaptation of the Plain White T's "Hey There, Delilah." It makes the point that the timid, compromised Democratic leadership Inside the Beltway is not a force for change and that if we want change we cannot depend on them. They suggest that replacing corrupt and reactionary Establishment Insiders with younger, fresher, tougher fighters with ideas and who share our values is the way to go. We couldn't agree more. Earlier this year I gave up on the "More and Better Democrats" refrain. At this point, it's exclusively the BETTER DEMOCRATS that I care about.

You are already familiar with Donna Edwards and Mark Pera if you've spent any time at DWT. Ed Fallon is running against overly conservative Democrat Leonard Boswell and like Donna Edwards and Mark Pera, Ed Fallon is taking on the whole Establishment to say WE WILL HOLD YOU ACCOUNTABLE. It's worth checking Ed out and supporting him.

One Democratic challenger who is not included in the video-- since he isn't running against an entrenched incumbent, but rather for the right to represent progressive values in IL-14 now that Denny Hastert has cut and run-- is John Laesch, in my mind as important as any electoral contest this year. On February 5 Illinois goes to the polls to help pick a Democrat for president. In the 14th CD they will also pick between John Laesch and a millionaire Insider being backed by the Establishment and a union carpenter armed with great ideas and solid principles.

This evening John will be the featured guest on Air America with Sam Seder. You'll be able to watch here and find out why Air America feels a race in IL-14 is of national interest. You'll also get an idea about why Laesch has been endorsed by progressives like Noam Chomsky, Lt. Governor Pat Quinn, Studs Terkel and virtually all the district's Democratic precinct committee people (as well as both the local and the national Progressive Democrats of America, the UAW, VET-PAC, the AFL-CIO and most of the local unions. (John's Blue Dog opponent has endorsements too-- from the Republican newspapers in the area and from the Insider Establishment types-- like war enabler Steny Hoyer-- this video is about and the Insider interest groups like NARL whose treachery was responsible for saddling us with Lieberman again.) John has also been endorsed by Blue America and I want to urge you to please consider making a contribution to his campaign today, here. Thanks. Enjoy the clip:




UPDATE FROM MELODY

Voting ends tomorrow in the first round of the search for a DFA All Star congressional candidate. Right now Nancy Skinner (MI-09) is in first place; great candidate. Right behind her is Roy Carter (NC-05) whose is opposing the deranged Virginia Foxx. Rounding out the top 3 is two-time Blue America endorsee Larry Kissell (NC-08). Also in the top 10 are Victoria Wulsin and John Laesch. One person who doesn't deserve to be in the top 10-- but is hanging on at #10-- is the Insider shill Christine Jennings (FL-13). Many progressives were upset that the Republicans stole her victory last year but the fact is, Jennings is the worst kind of fake-Democrat who would get into office and vote with the GOP on substantive matters the same way Melissa Bean, Jim Marshall, John Barrow, Heath Shuler, Dan Boren, Jason Altmire and Chris Carney do. These people are part of the problem, not the solution. That said, please consider voting in the DFA contest right now.

FEBRUARY IS ALMOST HERE-- AND IT CAN BE THE FIRST BIG BREAKTHROUGH OF THE YEAR FOR PROGRESSIVES

Earlier today we mentioned how Noam Chomsky had endorsed John Laesch for Congress. I cross-posted that at FDL and we had a lively discussion in their comments section. We had a few hundred dollars worth of small donations for John's campaign, especially when I finally explained why I think John's race is the most important upcoming primary.

Meanwhile, John Laesch would immediately seek to make the Progressive Caucus in Congress into a powerhouse with some real clout. If he’s elected, he’ll change the dynamics in Congress like NO OTHER FRESHMAN EVER HAS

That said, there are other crucial races in February-- and I'm not talking about the presidential primaries, where any of the Democrats are so superior to all of the pathetic pygmies that the disappoints many of us feel about Hillary and Obama are nearly irrelevant in comparison. Instead I'm talking about congressional primaries, where we really can make a difference. Aside from John Laesch, we have to keep Donna Edwards in mind and also Mark Pera.

Last night Pera made mincemeat out of his hapless reactionary opponent, Dan Lipinski, at a League of Women Voters debate. Lipinksi showed up 20 minutes late and was ill-prepared and made a fool out of himself, unable to answer questions of fact and unaware that with the Internet people would be cognizant of his actual votes and be able to point out the specifics of his lies and his attempts to make believe he votes with Democrats instead of with Bush. He didn't get away with anything and couldn't wait to run away and hide afterwards.

Today Markos at Daily Kos and Jane at FDL launched a campaign to encourage 5,000 new donors to give whatever they feel comfortable giving to Marks' campaign. You can do that right here. Jane thinks that between FDL, Digby, Crooks & Liars and DWT we should be able to bring our total number of donors up to 300 from 170 by the end of the week. Considering that Lipinski has been a loud, shrill voice in favor of the war and against woman's choice and against stem cell research, I hope we can shoot right past Jane's expectations.

But that's not all. MoveOn and the SEIU are calling on all progressives to pony up for Donna Edwards in her race against corrupt Insider hack Al Wynn. Here's the letter MoveOn sent out today:

We just got the message below from Andy Stern, head of the Service Employees union (SEIU). He asked us to pass it on to you-- it's an all-hands-on-deck moment for progressives.

The Democratic primary election in Maryland's 4th congressional district is being watched closely by other Democrats who are wondering if they'll be held accountable for cozying up to corporate lobbyists. We need to make sure the answer is a resounding "yes!"

MoveOn members have already raised $100,000 to help progressive champion Donna Edwards, but the incumbent, right-wing Democrat Al Wynn, has special interest dollars pouring into his campaign. If we can raise $90,000 by Tuesday, we can put a fair-but-tough ad on the air that tells voters about Wynn's ties to oil companies and other special interests. Please help.

Carl Pope, Executive Director of the Sierra Club, weighed in for Donna too:

"We expect every member of Congress to lead in the effort to reduce global warming, protect our environment, and create good jobs. I know Donna Edwards will do that and more.

So... how about $15-- $5 for John, $5 for Mark and $5 for Donna? Think of it as an investment-- in the country we love... and depend on. Take a look at this cool video MoveOn put together to let folks in Maryland know about what Al Wynn has been up to:

THE REALLY IMPORTANT RACES THIS WINTER-- JOHN LAESCH, DONNA EDWARDS, VIC WULSIN, RANDI SCHEURER, MARK PERA...

When you think "change," is THIS what pops into your head?

All eyes that aren't focused on the looming recession and the war without end the Bush Regime's policies are leaving us, are focused on the presidential primaries and caucuses that will determine who will replace him one year from now. It's unlikely that any of the pathetic pygmies running to personify a third George Bush term can beat any of the Democrats seeking their party's nomination. In fact, the lead GOP contender-- McCain this week-- is thoroughly reviled by a great many Republicans, not because his voting record isn't far right enough-- it is-- but because they consider him an asshole and a phony-- he is-- and because he opposed torture and supported Bush's pro-corporate immigration policies. Among the Democrats, Hillary is no longer seen quite as inevitable as she was viewed before her third place finish in Iowa and close call in New Hampshire. But between Romney's and Giuliani's implosions, Huckabee's inability to catch on beyond the narrow confines of the evangelical crusade tents and the Chuck Norris fan club, and Frederick of Hollywood's long, long snooze, next November I expect her to beat McCain. OK, can we move on to something else now?

That something else, to me at least, are the races for the seats in the Senate and House. After the debacle of the current pathetic and anemic Democratic-lead Congress, it has become as clear as day that it isn't, after all, more Democrats that is needed. It's better Democrats. And that takes us back to the primaries. Three states have crucial ones coming up this winter, coming up real fast in fact: Illinois and Maryland on February 5 (Super Tuesday, presidentially speaking) and Ohio, one month later on March 4th. Illinois' and Maryland's primaries are expected to far exceed normal turnout for a congressional primary because of enthusiasm for the presidential candidates on the same day, especially in Illinois where Obama and Hillary have rabid support. Each of the three states has at least one race pitting a better Democrat against a status quo reactionary Insider.

And in Illinois there are actually 4 such races! DWT and Blue America have taken a position on 3 of them, the most of any state. We are urging this community to support John Laesch (IL-14), Mark Pera (IL-03) and Randi Scheurer (IL-08). All three are extremely difficult races. Randi and Mark seek to oust entrenched Republican-lite (actually not all that lite) Melissa Bean and Dan Lipinski, each of whom has abandoned basic Democratic Party values time and again to vote with the worst reactionaries in Congress to rubber stamp the toxic Bush agenda, internationally and domestically. Voting for Lipinski and Bean is like voting for a Republican. Just as tough is John Laesch's race against an Insider-backed millionaire, Blue Dog Bill Foster for the seat long-occupied by resigning disgraced crook Denny Hastert. Laesch came closer to knocking him off last year than anyone else in his congressional history and, in the process, has built a viable progressive machine in northern Illinois. Now he has to face a big-spending Rahm Emanuel hack and opportunist. I can't think of a more important race in the entire country on February 5.

But there is one of equal importance-- the only high visibility primary in the state of Maryland. Last year Donna Edwards seemed to have beaten corrupt, corporate stooge Al Wynn in MD-04-- until some last minute voting boxes were suddenly found, all full of Al Wynn ballots. He managed to keep his seat. Donna is way better known in the district now-- and so is Wynn. The Insider Establishment, lead by Bush collaborators Steny Hoyer and Nancy Pelosi-- with Emanuel pulling their strings from behind the curtain as always-- is desperate to keep their boy Wynn in office. But Donna has put together an energized coalition of labor, environmentalists, reformers, women, anti-war activists, and supporters from the grassroots and netroots. Of all the races February 5 this is probably our best shot at a victory.

Any of these progressives getting into Congress will send a shock wave, a much-needed shock wave, through the party establishment and a message that the Democratic Party is a people's party, not a vehicle for special interests and careerists. On top of that, both Laesch and Edwards, especially, promise to be genuine progressive leaders and actual agents of change (unlike, say Huckabee, Flip Flop, Obama, Hillary... even Bush.)

Bush said Friday he doesn’t take it personally when Democratic and Republican presidential candidates embrace change as a major campaign theme.

“Oh, listen, if you're running for office, you can't run for office and not say, ‘I'm an agent of change,’" Bush told NBC News’ David Gregory. “That's just American politics. If I were running for office at this point I'd be saying, ‘Vote for me, I'm-- I'm gonna be an agent of change.’"

Yes, well he's talking about Obama and McCain and Hillary and Romney-- but if he thinks Donna Edwards and John Laesch are in that category, he's in for a big, big surprise. Both will be more than just good, solid progressive votes in Congress-- votes for the people and against the special interests. Each is an idea person and each is a tough and persistent fighter. I fully expect Laesch to whip the near moribund Progressive Caucus into shape and make it a real force in Congress, a counterweight to the Insider power elite represented by Emanuel and Hoyer.

And then there's Ohio one month later. The most crucial race is in the legendary second CD, an uber-Republican district represented by far right crazy-woman Mean Jean Schmidt. Dr. Victoria Wulsin nearly beat her in 2006 and she's poised to finish the job this year. But the Republican establishment has a trick up it's sleave-- a lifelong millionaire Republican, Steve Black, claims he is now a Democrat and wants to run against Mean Jean. Black has hired Emanuel DC hack John Lapp (an ex-DCCC Rove type slash and burn expert in the most vicious and vile kinds of negative campaigning). So far Lapp's main contribution to Black's campaign is a ridiculous and almost lurid ad claiming Doctor Wulsin isn't a doctor-- and this is based on his sexist overlooking of the fact that she got her medical license under her maiden name before she was married. Look at the ad; it's the reason a wealthy Republican shill thinks Democrats in OH-02 should nominate him to be their candidate. Hopefully Democrats in southwest Ohio will tell Black and Lapp where to go.

The other congressional primaries in Ohio are in the third CD to take on incumbent Michael Turner and the Democrats running are David Esrati, Jane Mitakides, and Charles W. Sanders.; the seventh CD (Dave Hobson's old seat) where Bill Conner, Sharen Neuhardt, Jack Null, Thomas Scrivens, David Woolever, and Richard Wyderski are the Democrats running; the tenth CD where disgruntled Democrats Joe Cimperman, Thomas O’Grady, Rosemary Palmer, and Barbara Ferris are challenging incumbent Democrat Dennis Kucinich; the 12th CD, where Democrats sense Pat Tiberi may be vulnerable and the race has drawn 4 hopefuls: Aaron Dagres, Marc Fagin, Russ Goodwin, and David Robinson; a similar situation in the 14th, where Steve LaTourette actually is vulnerable and will have to face either Bill O’Neill, Dale Blanchard, or John Greene; the 16th CD-- open because of the departure of Ralph Regula-- where both the DC and local Democratic establishments are firmly behind John Boccieri but where a last minute entry by Mary Cirelli throws a spanner into their plans; and a quixotic primary in OH-18 where reactionary freshman Zack Space is being challenged by Mike Pitrone.

The Blue America endorsed candidates, John Laesch, Randi Scheurer, Mark Pera, Donna Edwards, and Vic Wulsin can all use some help. If you have some spare money you want to put towards a better America, it will do a lot more good on any of these races than throwing it into the huge pots being collected by Clinton and Obama. You can donate at the link at the beginning of this paragraph and keep in mind, even $5 and $10 donations add up and help fight the well-heeled candidates bought and paid for by the special interests whose main interests are to screw the rest of us.

WHY DOES DAN LIPINSKI (D-IL) HATE GAY PEOPLE? WILL NANCY PELOSI DO A FUNDRAISER FOR HIM TOO?

I don't know what's in Lipinski's heart, but I know how he votes

I had very mixed emotions about the passage of the Employment Nondiscrimination Act yesterday. The fact that it left transgendered people out is intolerable. The fact that it protects millions of American men and women from job discrimination is glorious.

It gets kind of mucked up when you look at the motivations of some of the people who voted for it and against it. Well, basically everyone who voted for it was well-motivated on one level or another, even if they were kind of participating in throwing transgendered persons under the bus. But there are two types of people who voted against it: all the Republicans and a small handful of bigoted, reactionary Democrats over in the hate corner and then an even smaller handful of Democrats in the equality corner who don't believe categories of people should be discriminated against. The link at the top of this post includes an excellent rationale from Congressman Jerry Nadler about why couldn't vote for the bill unless it included transgendered people.

One of the Democrats in the hate corner with the Republicans is reactionary Bush Dog Dan Lipinski-- who also opposes women's right to choice and stem cell research but LOVES that war in Iraq. As usual-- being Tennessee's 10th Congressman-- he voted alongside the Southern reactionaries he usually votes with.

Fortunately a real Democrat, one who stands by progressive values and principles-- Mark Pera-- is challenging Lipinski in the Illinois primary. Like most people in Illinois, Pera does support women's choice and stem cell research and equal protection under the law in the workplace. This morning he sent me his point of view on the passage of ENDA.

As an assistant Cook County State's Attorney, I have spent the last 10 years ensuring that people are equally protected under the law.

I believe it is one of the bedrock principles of our country that every American is entitled to be treated fairly regardless of their age, gender, race, national origin or religion. The Employee Non-Discrimination Act, or ENDA, simply makes it illegal to discriminate against any American in the workplace because of his or her sexual orientation.

No American should be subject to employment discrimination or have their right to work revoked because of sexual orientation.

Congress has a responsibility to ban any form of discrimination in the workplace in order to protect the rights of all workers against the biases of their employers.

Given the opportunity, I would have proudly voted in favor of ENDA as the House approved it yesterday.

ENDA is a landmark piece of civil rights legislation. Its approval tells millions of gay and lesbian Americans that they are entitled to the same employment protections as everyone else and that they do not need to live in fear of losing their jobs due to their sexual orientation.

Unfortunately, the Congressman from Illinois' 3rd District doesn't believe all Americans are entitled to the rights already granted to them by our state government.

As he has many times in the past, Congressman Dan Lipinski sided with President Bush and the Republicans again yesterday and voted against ENDA. He was the only Democrat in the Illinois delegation to vote against the proposal.

In fact-- other than the seven representatives who voted against ENDA on the grounds that it didn't go far enough-- Lipinski was the only northern Democrat, and just one of 18 Democrats overall, to oppose the bill.

While Illinois is one of 30 states that already has an "ENDA" law in place at the state level, Lipinski demonstrated that he does not believe that all Americans are entitled to equal protection under the law and that employment discrimination has no place in our society.

Every American has the right to expect to be treated equally. It is appalling that a Democratic representative from Illinois fails to uphold that fundamental principle.

Congress will be a better place with one less Dan Lipinski. And it will be a much better place with Mark Pera. If you'd like to experience what a great candidate Mark is, take a look at his live blog session at Firedoglake from early September. And if you'd like to help out in his race, he's on our Blue America ActBlue page.

DONNA EDWARDS-- A VOICE FOR POST-BUSH AMERICA

Let me lay it right on the line. A couple of months ago when Bush flew to Seattle to do a fundraiser for rubber stamp hack Dave Reichert, the blogosphere dug deep and helped Darcy Burner outraise Bush and Reichert. How different is it for another creature from Inside the Beltway, Madam Off the Table, to be headlining a fundraiser for one of the most treacherous and sleazy Democrats in Congress, Al Wynn? Wynn has no Republican challenge. Pelosi is shameless-- and quickly losing all credibility. She is there to make sure Wynn can beat a brilliant, energetic and progressive real Democrat, Donna Edwards. If Donna Edwards were in Congress instead of Al Wynn, Maryland would have one of the nation's sharpest public policy minds at work for it. And America would have someone who understands what a progressive is and understands that the role of government is not just self-enrichment for officials.

Democrats like Donna Edwards, Mark Pera, and John Laesch are all in primary battles against reactionary hacks. They are battling the Insider socialization and the Democratic Establishment mindset that worked hand in glove to present our country with, and perpetuate, the foul Regime of George W. Bush. At best, Madam Off the Table has turned from a true blue progressive to a George Bush co-dependent. At worst she is a full-fledged collaborator.

George Bush will finally be gone in January of 2009, in all likelihood replaced by Hillary Clinton who will have to be a lot more progressive-- and a lot less a part of establishment insider corruption-- than her husband ever was to even begin to tackle the real mess being left by 8 years of the toxic Bush Regime. I have my doubts that she will measure up to the job; I hope I'm wrong. And that makes it even more essential to elect men and women like Donna Edwards, Mark Pera and John Laesch. Imagine being rid of the likes of Bush Dogs Al Wynn and Dan Lipinski, not to mention ultimate rubber stamp Denny Hastert-- 3 of the root causes of all that is wrong in Washington-- and replacing them with the best and the brightest!

We have seen this year that it is not good enough to just replace horrible Republicans with mediocre-- or worse than mediocre-- Democrats. There is probably little we can do, at least right now, to rid ourselves of Republican-lite garbage like John Barrow and Jim Marshall in Georgia, Gene Taylor in Mississippi or Chris Carney and Jason Altmire in Pennsylvania-- let alone Steny Hoyer or Rahm Emanuel. But Al Wynn and Dan Lipinski are weak and faltering and Donna Edwards and Mark Pera are strong and ascending. Simultaneously, the insider millionaire shill in IL-14, Blue Dog Bill Foster, is a laughing stock everywhere west of DCCC headquarters (not counting those whose fealty he has purchased) and John Laesch is poised to stomp his Blue Dog ass into the ground. Laesch is a natural and energetic leader for serious progressives who understands there is a real job to do in this country.

Saturday Nancy Pelosi Madam Off the Table will be in Silver Spring to help a reactionary and corrupt tool of the Bush Regime raise money to fight a strong and vibrant progressive voice. Pelosi knows no shame. She is owned by Hoyer and Emanuel and the Clinton Machine. She is them and not us. Let's give some special help over the next few days to Donna Edwards' campaign. Matt Stoller put together a special Act Blue page, Better Democrats that I want to invite you to visit. Matt also has a powerful explanation of what we're trying to accomplish over at OpenLeft, as does Jane at FDL. Donna's campaign put together a special Halloween video for today I thought you might enjoy:



And let me leave you with a statement from James Rucker of Color of Change:

"Black Americans have long relied on Black elected officials like Al Wynn to represent their interests in Washington, and far too often, they find those leaders unaccountable and compromised. Al Wynn has repeatedly worked against the interests of his Black constituents, siding instead with big business and the wealthy special interests that fund his campaigns.

Today, we're saying enough is enough. Donna Edwards, Wynn's opponent in the Democratic primary, has been a powerful advocate for policies that benefit the Black community, especially low-income Black folks. She has an excellent record of public service, and we are confident that once in office she will serve her constituents with integrity and accountability.

While Nancy Pelosi holds a fundraiser this weekend in support of one of the least accountable members of the Congressional Black Caucus, we're asking Black folks to stand up, demand better representation, and support Donna Edwards for Congress."

MARK PERA ON A ROLL AGAINST A FALTERING BUSH DOG REACTIONARY IN ILLINOIS

For an increasing number of people, the Internet has become a primary source of news. It's also a more targeted source. For people interested in politics, the days of listening to bullshit from incumbents is long in the past. Because of tools like ProgressivePunch, for example, voters are two clicks away from their congressmember's actual voting record-- like Dan Lipinski's. Yes, he may be a Democrat in a decidedly Democratic district but his voting record, especially when it comes to core issues, like a woman's right to choice or the occupation of Iraq is pure Republican. He doesn't mention that when he asks voters to re-elect him.

Today's Chicago Tribune features a piece by Jim Tankersley about Lipinski's desperate battle to hold onto a seat he should never have held to begin with, Bloggers Dog Dems Who Vote Bush. Woof, woof!

Tankersley has noticed the Bush Dog campaign that is attempting to hold reactionary Democrats accountable for voting with Republicans on core issues. And he turned to bloggers from OpenLeft, Arch Pundit and DWT to help explain the phenomenon to his readers.

Matt Stoller, the editor of openleft.com and the architect of the "Bush Dog" campaign, proclaimed Lipinski the first "Bush Dog" to be targeted in a primary by the "netroots." In an interview, he said Lipinski was "not a good Democrat."

"Bush has made it very clear that he's not withdrawing from Iraq, and he's not going to sign anything that would lead to withdrawal from Iraq," Stoller said. "Either Lipinski knows this, and he's misleading everyone, or he's stupid."

While many of the "Bush Dogs" hail from Republican-leaning districts, Lipinski's traditionally votes Democratic. That galls some of the other bloggers who have joined Stoller in supporting Pera.

Lipinski votes "like a right-wing nut," said Howie Klein, who runs downwithtyranny .com and is one of the leaders of Blue America, a political action committee founded by bloggers. But, he added, "He's not in some radical right district."

ArchPundit, OpenLeft and DWT aren't going to win this race. Mark Pera, an exceptionally good candidate, is. Bloggers can help get his message out and help rally some support in terms of volunteers and financial contributions but without a good candidate, bloggers can't do much at all in these kinds of races. And, as we've seen when Mark visited us over at Firedoglake September 8, Illinois' third CD certainly has an opportunity to elect a congressman who will be far superior to Lipinski.
Today's Tribune story begins with a quote from Pera.

"Every time Bush needs a vote," the Democrat from Western Springs, Ill., says, "he turns to Dan Lipinski and gets it."

In the most recent quarter, Mark outraised Lipinski, $100,000 to $75,000. And $30,000 of Mark's total, more than the difference between the two came via ActBlue. While Lipinksi was raking in the dough from the Chicago Machine and Inside the Beltway lobbyists. In fact, one of Lipinksi's donors was Louisiana Republican Rep. Richard Baker's Back America's Conservative PAC, which normally just gives to GOP incumbents but in this case has chosen to give to a Democratic incumbent who, at least when the chips are down, votes with the GOP.

The primary in IL-03 is one that can be won. So far 108 Blue America donors have given Mark $1,860. If you'd like to help keep that going, here's the place to do it.

HEY, LIPINSKI, WHO'S YOUR DADDY?

Today's Daily Southtown raised the uncomfortable question for the congressman from the district, Dan Lipinski, Who's your daddy?. No, it's not a debate over whether or not he's a bastard; it's a debate over whether or not his father manipulated and subverted the Democratic process to get him into office-- and if he's continuing to do so to keep him in office now.

Blue America and grassroots activists in Chicagoland have endorsed Mark Pera for the seat, primarily because Lipinski has been a shameful rubber stamp for the Bush agenda, domestically and internationally. His voting record is putrid and he's as likely to vote with the Republicans on core substantive issues as to vote with the Democratic Party. He's virulently anti-choice and even opposes stem cell research. We've covered this boll weevil before and our contribution site for Mark Pera is open 24/7. Feel free...

Before we get to what irks so many Democrats in IL-03-- above and beyond Lipinski's reactionary stand on the issues-- there was something in the story that caught my attention. I've been complaining for 2 years now about how corrupt California Republican Jerry Lewis has been wrecking democracy in his district by controlling who will run against him (a challenger with no intention of campaigning or winning). Apparently Lewis isn't the only corrupt pol using this shameful trick. According to Daily Southtown reporter Kristen McQueary, the elder Lipinski used the same tactic to get his ne'er-do-well son into office.

William Lipinski had arranged for a Republican challenger to fill the opposing slot - a challenger who had no intention on campaigning or winning the election.

Many in Chicago expect that Lipinski will also confuse voters by finding at least one puppet "opponent" to jump into the race as well, a diversion.

While Pera says he won't focus on Lipinski and his father, his campaign staff got their hands on documents sure to stoke the fire. William Lipinski has long operated a campaign fund called the All-American Eagle account. Designed to raise money for youth activities in the 3rd District, the fund mainly serves as a clandestine political fund, dishing money to Dan Lipinski's inner circle, including consulting fees totaling $13,500 during the past five years to chief of staff Jerry Hurckes and communications director Chris Ganschow. BY creating a political action committee in Illinois the Lipinskis avoided stringent federal guidelines that would prohibit such activities.

Between the elder Lipinski's consulting business, Blue Chip Consulting, which rents space at the Archer Avenue congressional headquarters of Dan Lipinski, and the 23rd Ward political operation, Dan Lipinski has placed his governmental duties precariously close to lobbyists and political entities. Not smart.

When Dan Lipinski won an assignment to the House Transportation Committee, he insisted he would avoid any conflicts of interest. His father represents United Airlines and many other transportation giants.

"He won't lobby me," Lipinski said.

Dan Lipinski's own disclosure forms, however, show he paid Blue Chip $5,500 in consulting fees since 2005-- a contradiction of his previous position, which was dubious from the start. Who would know if, for example, over cheeseburgers and milkshakes, the two Lipinskis discussed transportation issues? Like many questionable loose ends that remain unanswered - how, for example, voting records show Dan Lipinski casting ballots in person, in Chicago, at times when he was living out of state - the All-American Eagle account creates yet another shadow on Dan Lipinski's credentials.

McQueary thinks pops is bring dangerous attention to his own and junior's "ethical lapses" and making the "kid" look weak and unprincipled. "William Lipinski is painting a target on his son's back, forcing him to answer questions about the questionable payments to staff members; the consulting fees to Blue Chip; and the fundamental fact that a fund supposedly established for kids really is a piggy bank for the Lipinskis' political activities." It makes residents of the district ask him "who's your daddy?"

DOES MARILYN MUSGRAVE GET A FREE RIDE TO RE-ELECTION NOW THAT ANGIE HAS DECIDED NOT TO RUN?

There are a lot of races across the country for grassroots, anti-war and progressive activists to get involved with. Colorado's 4th CD was a special target for two reasons: one of the worst incumbents anywhere, a wretched homophobic maniac who has never voted in the interests of humanity-- on anything-- since she took office and in the person of Angie Paccione, a truly worthy opponent who would have made an excellent representative of the interests of ordinary people.

Last year 827 Blue America activists donated over $15,000 to Angie's campaign. Over 225,000 votes were cast and only 7,000 separated Angie from Musgrave. W had every reason to hope that 2008 would be a victory for the forces of progressive democracy over the forces of Hatred and Bigotry embodied by the foul Musgrave.

I have no inside information about why Angie dropped out. According to an article about the race in today's Congressional Quarterly "Kyle Saunders, a Colorado State University political scientist who analyzes congressional races, described Paccione as the party’s strongest candidate and said her decision not to run is not great news for Democrats." Instead of a forthright, fighting progressive CO-04 will now have to make due with a moderate establishment insider who is widely viewed as part of the Bush Dog-leaning Salazar machine (i.e.- Republican lite). Better than Musgrave? Absolutely. Worth fighting for? Well... that's a tougher question.

Betsy Markey is unlikely to be the kind of leader progressive nationally are looking for. But she will probably be a semi-dependable vote for core Democratic initiatives and could be a decent representative for CO-04. Blue America will certainly be rooting for her to beat the execrable Musgrave but we'll leave the fundraising to the insiders and machine pols to work out.

We're far more interested in the candidacies of progressives than we are in hack Democrats. Today Sandra from DFA blogged about the latest turn of events in a race we are very much interested in, the primary against Bush Dog Dan Lipinski by Blue America-endorsed candidate Mark Pera. The elder Lipinski, the right-leaning ex-congressman who was able to install his right-leaning shiftless son from Tennessee into the Chicago area congressional seat, is working a scam to help finance his son's tough re-election campaign. Basically, he's using a charitable children's fund to raise money for little Dan. You can help thwart the Lipinskis and defeat an anti-choice, pro-war Bush Dog by helping Mark Pera-- here.

Announcement: Tomorrow (Wednesday) at 7:30pm, EDT Rep. Tom Allen (D-ME) will be a guest at Firedoglake, discussing the Iraq occupation on the 5th anniversary of the authorization for the Use of Force which, of course, he opposed-- and still opposes. Come meet this extraordinary congressman, who's running against pathetic rubber stamp Liebermanite Susan Collins.

END OF THE QUARTER... SOME PROGRESSIVE PRIORITIES

I've been hearing so many people complaining about "The Democrats." Why aren't they doing what we elected them to do? Why are they wasting time condemning the MoveOn newspaper ad instead of getting us out of Iraq or, crucially important for our country's soul, impeaching Bush and Cheney? Are they as bad as The Republicans? Who are "The Democrats?" We've been telling you about scum like Rahm Emanuel and Steny Hoyer for years. They are as bad as Republicans, even if they do sometimes, for whatever putrid reason, wind up voting for positions our progressive values dictate.

Today is the last day of the quarter for campaign fundraising. Humor me for a moment and open up the Blue America ActBlue page run by DWT, Crooks & Liars, Firedoglake and Digby. No presidentials on that page-- just candidates and incumbents committed to progressive values and ideals. And some of them are in primary races against the other kind of Democrat, the kinds who vote against the interests of working men and women. We only endorse in primary battles when there is a clear case of a progressive versus a reactionary-- a Ned Lamont vs Lieberman situation. In many of these races, the Democratic primary is tantamount either to election or-- worse-- to a choice between a reactionary Democrat and an even more reactionary Republican. Bleeeech!

Now is the time to effect that. Now is the time we can act in concert to derail some of the reactionary Democrats who give Bush the margin of victory to keep his toxic agenda of war and devastation and corruption hurtling down the tracks. Our collective action, in coordination with local grassroots activists, has already frightened off establishment, opportunistic Democrats seeking to get their reactionary asses into races against Darcy Burner and Eric Massa. But some of our Blue America candidates are still facing opposition from the wrong kind of Democrats. These are the ones we should be concentrating on right now.

We have one progressive incumbent, Steve Cohen, being challenged by an untrustworthy DLC-backed candidate in Memphis. Steve's voting record is the 4th most progressive among the freshman class and when it comes to Iraq, to the well-being of our military personnel, to environmental issues, and to health care his votes are 100% on the Progressive Punch scale. Steve has earned our support. If you want another compromising, corrupt reactionary to replace a real Democrat, do nothing to help Steve keep his seat. And now is the time in this district that went 70% for Kerry.

Donna Edwards is an old friend who should be running for president instead of for Congress. But first steps first. She's challenging a Steny Hoyer hack, a corrupt thug who has sold out his constituents on every occasion, the notorious Al Wynn. Donna seemed to have beaten him last year until some suspect last minute ballot boxes turned up. She's far better known now and she has a much better chance of beating Wynn.

Victoria Wulsin nearly beat Mean Jean Schmidt in southwest Ohio last year. This year, far better known, she is poised to close the deal. And wouldn't you just know it, some rich, opportunist shows up to muddy the waters. Vic was one of our favorite candidates in 2006 and we need to back her as strongly this year, now in the primary and then against Mean Jean in November of 2008.

With Denny Hastert finally slinking off in disgrace, we have a chance to elect a Democrat in IL-14. But what kind of a Democrat is up to us. There are two visions competing here-- a Blue Dog who will be a bit better than a Republican and then there's John Laesch, a union carpenter and Iraq War vet who is deeply grounded in progressive values. The choice couldn't be clearer. Unfortunately, though predictably, the Blue Dog is a millionaire eager to buy the seat. John... well, like I said... he's one of us, a working person.

South of John's district is IL-03, currently misrepresented by one of the worst of the Bush Dogs, Dan Lipinski, a Democrat in name only. He firmly opposes women's right to choice (and even stem cell research!) and consistently backs Bush on his war agenda and on domestic spying. Fortunately we have an incredible candidate running against him, Mark Pera, who has a real shot to defeat this slimebag right in Rahm Emanuel's own backyard. Lipinski has enlisted a gaggle of pathetic allies to jump into the race and split the vote, a tactic he employed last year as well. The netroots and local grassroots activists aren't being tricked and the opposition to the odious Lipinski has rallied behind Mark.

Our candidate in upstate western New York, Jon Powers, is taking on rubber stamp Republican Tom Reynolds and he has a great shot at defeating him. But first he has to defeat Alice Kryzan, one of Reynold's financial backers who is running as a "Democrat" to confuse voters. Most Democrats in the district who know her, and that isn't many, know her as the attorney for Occidental Petroleum who called the citizen uproar over the toxic disaster known as Love Canal "hysteria." Jon is a very different kind of candidate and I'd like to urge you to read his live session at Firedoglake and then think about donating what you can to his campaign and the campaigns of the other exceptional candidates mentioned here. Do it right here; it'll make you feel good.

THE BLOGOSPHERE RALLIES BEHIND MARK PERA

Yesterday Markos over at Daily Kos kicked off a huge effort to dislodge despicable Bush Dog Dan Lipinski and replace him with a stalwart progressive, Mark Pera in Illinois' 3rd congressional district. Chris Bowers at Open Left, DavidNYC at Swing State Project, and Jonathan Singer at MyDD, all followed suit, joining Crooks & Liars, Firedoglake, Down With Tyranny, Arch Pundit and most of the local Illinois blogs and activist groups in declaring for Pera's campaign. Please take a look at the live blog session Mark did for Blue America on September 8th and think about giving him a hand to defeat a Bush rubber stamp who shames the Democratic Party. Our Blue America page is open for Mark now-- and always.

This cycle's rallying cry: "More and better Democrats. Mark Pera fits the bill.

RENEGADE DEMOCRATS IN CONGRESS SHOULD REAP WHAT THEY'VE SEWN, NO LESS THAN REPUBLICANS-- THAT'S WHAT PRIMARIES ARE FOR

Are Democrats better than Republicans? How about, both Inside the Beltway parties suck but all the Republicans are horrible and some Democrats haven't succumbed? In fact, most of the Democrats are voting pretty well on Iraq and most of the key issues facing the country. But there are 3 or 4 dozen reactionaries, mostly, though not exclusively, from the Old Confederacy, who team up with the Republican minority to thwart any kind of progressive agenda. We saw that this week quite a bit, didn't we?

Yesterday's Congressional Quarterly had an awkwardly titled story about how Democrats have to face up to this problem: "Possible Primary Challenges Haunt Democrats Struggling With Iraq Policy." The story has a pretty Inside the Beltway perspective.

House Democrats are peeved and Republicans are quietly delighted by warnings that anti-war groups may back primary challengers against Democrats who hesitate to directly challenge President Bush’s Iraq policy.

The threat of primary fights next year reminds congressional Democrats that as they search for a way to deal with the war, they must be mindful that part of their party’s base demands nothing less than a full legislative effort to get U.S. forces out of Iraq.

Republicans eager for any positive development regarding the 2008 elections say they can hardly believe their good fortune. Battles among Democrats would soak up campaign money and leave bad feelings that could spill over into the general elections.

Medea Benjamin, a leader of the women’s peace group Code Pink, said “There is a lot of anger’’ at Democrats who are seen as softening their war opposition, “especially in districts where people won in 2006 on an anti-war platform. They deserve to be challenged,’’ she said.

They certainly do-- and Blue America intends to help with that effort. Our Blue America page already is backing two outstanding progressive challengers, Donna Edwards (MD-04) and Mark Pera (IL-03), who are running against reactionary Bush-Dems Al Wynn and Dan Lipinski. CQ's information is badly messed up on who might be credibly primaried. They name Brian Baird (WA), Ellen Tauscher (CA), Wynn (MD), Joe Donnelly (IN), Hank Johnson (GA), and Jerry McNerney (CA). Johnson has one of the very best voting records of anyone in Congress and no one is seriously thinking of backing a challenge to him. McNerney has had a couple of rough spots with some of his most idealistic supporters but nothing that will amount to a challenge, especially when you consider that his actual voting record is excellent. Wynn, is not in the "maybe" category. He's being challenged-- big time. Neither Donnelly, Tauscher nor Baird have attracted an opponent, step #1 for a serious challenge. Dan Lipinksi, not mentioned in the CQ piece has 3.

Even the most stalwart progressive congressional Democrats tend to discourage primaries against their colleagues. Lynn Woolsey is an heroic exception. “'It’s perfectly legitimate for constituents to express disappointment. But strategically it’s a mistake to go after those Democrats,' said Jim McGovern, D-Mass., who says Congress should not approve more war funding without Bush’s agreement to withdraw American forces from Iraq next year. McGovern said anti-war forces should target their efforts elsewhere. 'I think everybody’s fire should be aimed at Republicans,' he said. 'What has screwed everything up is that Republicans, with near-total unison, have stayed with the president on the war.'"

Today the Democratic leadership tried ginning up some anti-Republican anger among the base regarding Bush's threat to veto the bill both houses of Congress pass regarding Children's health care. The horrible Republicans, the horrible Republicans," we heard them moan. But did they mention that there are 10 Democrats also voting against childrens' health care. Why should we be angry at the Republicans but not the Democrats who voted the same way? Yet you can count on the DCCC and the Democratic leadership to go to the wall to save the skins of reactionary Democrats who don't enthuse Democrats, like Dan Boren (OK), Jim Cooper (TN), Joe Donnelly (IN), Brad Ellsworth (IN), Baron Hill (IN), Bob Etheridge (NC), Mike McIntyre (NC), Heath Shuler (NC), Jim Marshall (GA), and Gene Taylor (MS).

Neil Abercrombie, D-Hawaii, said the anti-war groups’ threat, coupled with pressure within the House Democratic Caucus to settle for nothing less than mandating a speedy withdrawal from Iraq, amounts to a “recapitulation of the Inquisition.’’

Abercrombie, who with John Tanner, D-Tenn., is lobbying Democratic leaders to permit a vote on their proposal requiring Bush to devise a plan for withdrawal but without setting withdrawal deadlines, called any effort to squelch debate within the caucus “very ill-considered.”

...Republican leaders are gleeful. “I just sit on the side and have a big grin on my face,’’ said Tom Cole, R-Okla., head of the National Republican Congressional Committee.

Cole pointed to criticism of Democrats by the anti-war group MoveOn.org, which has become a GOP target since it sponsored an advertisement that Republicans denounced as an over-the-top attack on Iraq commander Gen. David H. Petraeus. “This is a constituent group that thinks it is the Democratic Party, and they’re madder at the Democrats than they are at us,’’ Cole said.

Cole’s NRCC predecessor, Thomas M. Reynolds, R-N.Y., said that if primary challenges develop, Democratic leaders will face tough choices.

“One thing we’ll see is if the leadership gets involved defending members, and if leadership does that, it has all kinds of cross-currents down the political river,’’ Reynolds said.

MoveOn.org says it will announce on Sept. 24 the results of an online poll that asked its members whether the groups should back primary challenges.

On the other hand, Cole and the NRCC hardly look like they'll be in a position to take advantage of anything. Aside from being nearly bankrupt and unable to raise any money, bitter infighting has spilled over into a battle royale between Cole and the hapless and ineffectual Boehner. Cole says if Boehner doesn't back down he can take the pointless, thankless job of trying to win back a GOP majority in Congress and shove it up his ass.


IF YOU'RE JUST WAITING FOR THINGS TO GET BETTER... NEVERMIND. ACTION, ON THE OTHER HAND...

An editorial in yesterday's NY Times didn't call for primaries against reactionary Bush-Dems, but they sure laid out the problem.

If you were one of the Americans waiting for Congress, under Democratic control, to show leadership on the war in Iraq, the message from the Senate is clear: “Nevermind.” The same goes for those waiting for lawmakers to fix the damage done to civil liberties by six years of President Bush and a rubber-stamp Republican Congress.

The Democrats don’t have, or can’t summon, the political strength to make sure Congress does what it is supposed to do: debate profound issues like these and take a stand. The Republicans are simply not interested in a serious discussion and certainly not a vote on anything beyond Mr. Bush’s increasingly narrow agenda.

Think Al Wynn. Think Dan Lipinski. Then think about Donna Edwards and Mark Pera-- and Blue America.

9 FRESHMEN CONGRESSMEN SEND A LETTER TO GEORGE BUSH-- IN SIMPLE TERMS SO HE CAN UNDERSTAND IT ALL BY HIMSELF

Although it was a Blue America-endorsed incumbent who sent me the letter, dated September 12, it arrived at DWT Headquarters and at the headquarters of the Bush Regime on Representative Chris Murphy's stationary.

Dear Mr. President

We are writing to inform you that we will not support appropriating additional funds for U.S. military operations in Iraq unless a firm date is given to begin safe redeployment of our troops from Iraq.

Our military should not be tasked with using force to suppress a civil war. The recent study by the Government Accountability Office confirms that our current strategy is not working, and that this is a conflict that begs for a political, not a military, solution. Though the United States should play a constructive role in any potential political solution to the conflict we helped create, an open-ended military strategy in Iraq will only lead to more death, more casualties, and greater cost to the American taxpayer. Already, this war has led to more than 3,750 fatalities, and tens of thousands of injuries. It has cost more than $500 billion, creating a debt that future generations will be forced to bear.

The men and women of our military have performed valiantly and selflessly, and are true American heroes. They deserve to know when they can expect to come home. The time has come to redeploy our troops out of Iraq, and to hold the Iraqis responsible for their future.

It is signed by 9 of the most progressive members of the freshman class:
Christopher Murphy (D-CT)
Hank Johnson (D-GA)
Betty Sutton (D-OH)
Ed Perlmutter (D-CO)
Phil Hare (D-IL)
Keith Ellison (D-MN)
Mike Arcuri (D-NY)
Stephen Cohen (D-TN)
Yvette Clarke (D-NY)

Democrats John Hall (NY) and Paul Hodes (NH) already signed a similar letter to Bush, authored by Lynn Woolsey, last month. This is the way the Democratic congressional majorities should be talking with Bush about the war-- and only this way. But it was all over for the congressional Democrats when they elected war supporters Steny Hoyer and Rahm Emanuel to top leadership positions in the caucus. These two have dragged their feet and surreptitiously undermined Pelosi every inch of the way, starting back in the 2006 primary season when they systematically scuttled anti-war progressives to make way for pro-war puppets like themselves.

They are ultimate followers, never leaders and slowly, slowly, slowly they are realizing which way the wind is blowing and are coming around the positions that would have been acceptable a year ago. Today Anne Flaherty did a piece for AP claiming that the Democrats will delay funding for the war, a lame and weak strategy by non-leaders.

Leaders? The guys in the list above. If you would like to send a message, please consider helping out Steve Cohen, who signed both letters, and is in a heated primary battle against a reactionary, corporate Democrat in Memphis.


UPDATE: AND WHAT ABOUT PROGRESSIVE CANDIDATES? HOW SHOULD THEY TALK ABOUT THE WAR WHEN RUNNING AGAINST BUSH ENABLERS?

The Blue America endorsed candidates all want to end American occupation of Iraq. This morning our candidate in IL-03, Mark Pera, made it clear how progressive candidates should go after reactionary Bush Dogs. His opponent, Rep. Dan Lipinski, is a war supporter on the hot seat. Here's a statement Mark sent out today that turns that heat up-- on him and on a Republican ally of his in a neighboring district:

There was not only a lot of discussion about Iraq on the national stage last week, but also locally in IL-03. Between Sept. 10 and 14, Congressman Dan Lipinski made a four appearances in and around the district to outline his strategy in Iraq. Twice he appeared with U.S. Rep. Mark Kirk, a tier one Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee-targeted Republican incumbent...

Democrat Mark Pera had the following to say in regards to Congressman Lipinski’s recent comments:

We heard Congressman Dan Lipinski talk last week about the war, but he has yet to justify why the American people should support an open-ended troop commitment in Iraq.

Let me again make clear my position: I have been advocating for months that our troops need to start coming home now and the drawdown should continue until the withdrawal is completed.

Congressman Lipinski wants more of the same:

Monday: Lipinski partnered with Republican U.S. Rep. Mark Kirk and a panel of experts in Chicago to outline his support for the recommendations of the 10-month-old Iraq Study Group (ISG) Report and said he would consider a proposal that would commit troops to Iraq for at least five years.

Tuesday: Congressman Lipinski appeared on WTTW, again with Kirk, and acknowledged that the surge has not worked, but offered no reason for his continued support of the war.

Wednesday: Lipinski said during a radio broadcast that Democrats needed to wait for Republicans to get on board in order to facilitate progress in Iraq.

Thursday: Congressman Dan Lipinski told a crowd at the Summit VFW Hall that he believes in a long-term commitment of troops to Iraq. Asked to provide a firm timeline for withdrawal, he said he couldn’t.

Let’s be clear about Congressman Lipinski’s voting record:

Congressman Lipinski’s Iraq record indicates he voted five times to fund the Iraq war to the tune of more than $260 billion. In 2005, he voted against a measure to begin an immediate withdrawal from Iraq.

This year Lipinski voted for an Iraq supplemental bill without a withdrawal timetable. He was one of only 13 Democrats representing Democratic districts to vote against the McGovern withdrawal proposal.

Now he tells us he’ll defer to Republicans, some of whom would be willing to keep troops in Iraq for a decade. In four years, taxpayers have already spent $450 billion on Iraq. We can’t afford a “more of the same” Iraq policy. We need real Democratic leadership on this issue.

Our troops are mired in a civil war. The Lipinski-Kirk-Bush Plan does not give us the leverage we need to end our involvement in Iraq. People work best when they are given a clear deadline. The Iraqis will not make any progress until they resolve their political differences and a withdrawal timetable forces them to do that.

Blue America backs Mark Pera and his approach. If you want to help, here's the place.

MOST AMERICANS HAVE PROBABLY NEVER HEARD THE TWO NAMES THAT ARE MOST IMPORTANT TO ME TODAY-- DONNA EDWARDS & MARK PERA

Yesterday we pointed out Lynn Woolsey's bold stand on Bush Dogs-- cheering progressive son who want to force them into primaries. We're hearing her colleague, Ms. Pelosi, is mighty pissed off. I wonder if that's an act-- I hope so-- and Pelosi is just being diplomatic. Who knows? I do know that I ocassionally get calls from the leadership telling me how much they hate this Bush Dog or that Bush Dog and whisper... very, very low, that no one would mind if they get slammed. Most of the anger towards Democrats voting for the Bush agenda regards Iraq. And Iraq can't be underplayed. But I want to remind everyone that there is pretty of egregious stuff going on above and beyond the catastrophe the Bush Regime has created in the Middle East. There's one, in fact, a lot closer to home. And, alas, there are more Democrats taking part than there should be.

Last year when Al Wynn had to resort to violence and vote stealing to hold onto his Maryland seat, he got the scare of his life. Donna Edwards really did beat him but suddenly some ballot boxes were discovered at the last minute and he scraped by. He immediately changed his voting habits on things he didn't really care about-- issues like FISA and Iraq and impeachment. "Rah, rah, rah-- I'm a Democrat now." But on bread and butter issues-- his bread and butter-- he's the same old slimy Al Wynn.

We don't usually quote the New Republic here or give much notice to Jonathan Chait but the day before yesterday he posted a story worth examining, Patronage Saint.

Nearly everybody was baffled when, half a dozen years ago, the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) mounted the strongest resistance to campaign finance reform within the Democratic Party. One CBC member, Al Wynn of Maryland, even co-sponsored (along with then Ohio Republican and current federal inmate Bob Ney) the counter-measure designed to kill reform. Numerous other Black Caucus members sided with Wynn. "You have the potential for opposites to come together," said Representative Bennie Thompson of Mississippi. "I'm talking about liberal African Americans and conservative white Republicans." Thompson has proven prophetic. Somehow, the Congressional Black Caucus has become the party's most reactionary wing.

One has to expect this kind of race-baiting from a Neocon propaganda rag like TNR, which conveniently skips over the fact that members like Barbara Lee (D-CA), Gwen Moore (D-WI), Bobby Scott (D-VA), Maxine Waters (D-CA), John Lewis (D-GA), Jesse Jackson, Jr, (D-IL) and a dozen other CBC members are among the most steadfast progressives in the entire Congress, and the conscience and moral backbone of American politics.

But back then Wynn was getting the lowest rankings, along with reactionary corporate shills Harold Ford, William Jefferson and Sanford Bishop, we took a look at his voting record-- and it made us sick. It's what convinced us to try to help a dynamic and brilliant young woman in the district, Donna Edwards, win a primary against him. Fortunately, she's running again and now is the time to give her a hand.

Now, back to the whole Bush Dog thing. There aren't many in solidly Democratic districts. But one who is, Dan Lipinski, was the subject of our Blue America discussion last weekend at Firedoglake. Our guest was Mark Pera, the progressive Democrat running against him. It's only been a few days and we've already raised over $1,300 for Mark's campaign. Today our pals at DailyKos, MyDD, OpenLeft and Swingstate Project are joining us in asking people to contribute to Mark's campaign. We think he's the progressive most likely to beat a Bush Dog and send a message to the Democratic Inside the Beltway establishment that we're really serious about ending the war and ending Bush's policies. Our Blue America page is open 24/7 and splitting a donation between Mark and Donna sends a message all the Bush Dogs and Blue Dogs need to heed. (MINI UPDATE: Blue Majority also hit it for Dan Maffei, the Blue America-endorsed candidate from upstate New York.)

WHEN IS THE RIGHT TIME TO PRIMARY REACTIONARY DEMOCRATIC INCUMBENTS? BLUE AMERICA WELCOMES MARK PERA, SOMEONE DOING JUST THAT

A lot of members in this community have been excited about Matt Stoller's Bush Dog expose and call to action. Blue America's long-term commitment to help replace reactionary and corrupt Maryland Congressman Al Wynn with Donna Edwards is coming from the same intention of trading in Democrats who collaborate with the right-wing agenda for Democrats who are believers in progressive values and principles. Some time ago I started watching a suspiciously conservative-voting congressman in a very blue Illinois district, Dan Lipinski in IL-03, an area that includes southwest Chicago and its mostly working class ethnic suburbs.

Several Chicago bloggers and local DFA members have asked me to get to know Mark Pera, president of the Lyons Township high school board of education and an Assistant State's Attorney in the Cook County State's Attorney Office, the second largest prosecutorial office in the country. I'm really glad I did and I hope you will be as well. He started the conversation off on the right note: "I represent the values of the Democratic Party... I'm from the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party and he's from the Republican wing of the Democratic Party. There's a place for people like him... and that's the Republican Party."

Lipinski slipped into Congress in 2004 when his father retired. If his voting record is frighteningly similar to reactionary Tennessee congressmen like John Tanner, Lincoln Davis, Bart Gordon, and Jim Cooper, that's because the representative from IL-03 has spent the last couple of decades outside of Illinois, mostly living in Tennessee. To this day he hasn't bothered buying a home in the district. He rents half a duplex in Western Springs but mostly lives in his congressional office. And I mean that literally. The July 13 issue of Daily Southtown quotes Lipinski telling a reporter, "Yes, I sleep in my office." He purchased an air mattress 18 months ago. The congressman, who makes $165,000 a year "showers in the House of Representatives gymnasium each morning. He keeps his socks and underwear in a filing cabinet. His suits and shirts are in the office closet. A staff member estimated the dimensions of the office as 20 feet by 13 feet... 'I make myself about six sandwiches every weekend and take them back with me,' Lipinski said. 'I don't think I've ever gone out for lunch in Washington.'"

Since entering Congress, Lipinski has wracked up quite a record. He's virulently anti-choice, anti-stem cell research, anti-environment, pro-war, and even voted with the Republicans to intervene in the Terri Schaivo case. He became part of the Bush Dog campaign when he voted with the Republicans on Bush's FISA legislation, something that stand's in stark contrast to Mark's well reasoned stand on FISA. For most DWT readers, I think I've said more than enough about Dan Lipinski. Now, what about Mark?

When he graduated from high school he went to work in the steel mills of East Chicago to raise money to send himself to college. He worked in the mills every summer through college and into law school to pay his tuition. Unions and understanding the needs of America's working men and women aren't just theoretical to him. He's building a ground campaign of grassroots activists that draws from a natural Illinois progressive coalition: pro-choice voters, anti-war voters, environmentalists, and the district's rapidly growing Hispanic community. Unseating an incumbent is always an uphill battle. Mark's is a winnable race. Before I ask you to kick in at our Blue America page, I want you to ask Mark questions about the issues that mean the most to you. I suspect you're going to be very happy with what you hear. Please join me today over at Firedoglake at 1pm (Chicago time), 11am, PT to chat live with Mark. His prosecutorial specialty, by the way, is environmental law. Sandra from the Northside DFA described him to me as "right on all the issues that Lipinski is so wrong on, he's charismatic, confident, and well spoken. And unlike Lipinski, if elected he will owe his allegiance to the people instead of to the Democratic machine. If you are a voter in District 3, it's a no-brainer."