Matt Cartwright Is A Strong Progressive In A District Trump Won

In 2012, Matt Cartwright waged a strong primary campaign against reactionary Blue Dog Tim Holden (one of the "Democrats" who joined with the GOP to vote against ObamaCare). Hoyer and Pelosi warned that a progressive like Cartwright could not win that red a seat in northeast Pennsylvania. Matt was one of Blue America's top candidates that year and we were in the trenches with him, while Hoyer ran around the district with a pack of lobbyists begging "people" to vote for Holden, a pro-frack-maniac. Matt won-- by a lot: 57.1% to 42.9% and then went on to beat the Republican Hoyer and Pelosi said he couldn't do by even more: 161,393 (60.3%) to 106,208 (39.7%). Matt then joined the Congressional Progressive Caucus and worked his way up to the caucus' whip. He was immediately appointed vice chair of the Sustainable Energy and Environment Coalition Caucus. Even before the election, he endorsed marriage equality, a position that the DCCC recommended that swing district Democrats stay away from. since then, he's had a 100% voting record from the Human Rights Campaign.

This week, Matt told me that when he first ran for Congress, "I promised to be a Roosevelt Democrat-- someone who stands up for the ordinary working people of the United States, for their safety, their economic security, their access to healthcare, their clean air and water, and their civil rights. I promised to be someone who isn’t afraid to take on what FDR called the 'economic royalists,' the powerful, the moneyed, and the connected. Drawing on the words of the late Paul Wellstone, I ran as a proud member of the 'Democratic wing of the Democratic Party.' It was my belief that, as Democrats, we do not ever need to forfeited these principles, even in so-called difficult districts.I have never abandoned these values, or hidden them, and I believe my voting record reflects that. My congressional story is a demonstration that when we have the courage of our convictions, and stand for them in a forthright manner, we can win districts like mine with a consistently progressive message. If it means working a little harder, we’re not afraid of that."

He was reelected in 2014 and in 2016, while Trump won his district by 10 points, Matt won by 7.5 points. In 2018 the GOP threw a self-funding Wall Street crook up against him (who spent $1,687,182 of his own money on the race) and, even with the district gerrymandered against him, he beat the Republican by over 9 points.

This year, the GOP has a fringe nut, Jim Bognet, who won the crowded Republican primary on one message: claiming he is the Trump candidate. Lately, as Trump's approval continues to sink in northeast Pennsylvania, Bognet is trying to back away from his Trump-adhesion.

This year, Matt's district is rated a "toss up." A few days ago Ted Lieu called me and asked if Blue America could help raise campaign funds for Matt, who he told me needs some help to overcome the Republican onslaught. Matt is their #1 target among House incumbents.

Ted told me that he and Matt are co-chairs of the House Democratic Policy and Communications Committee, and that he had gotten to know him well. "He is an amazing Member of Congress who has advanced strong progressive values in a district that Trump won by 10 points," said Lieu. "Matt has shown remarkable courage, determination and grit. He is in a tough race again and we must bring him back to Congress. I hope you can help Matt. And as a bonus, every Democratic voter that Matt turns out in his district is also very likely to vote for Biden over Trump in the crucial swing state of Pennsylvania."

Another strong and activist Democrat who Matt serves with in the House, Jamie Raskin (D-MD), wants us to let DWT readers that, in his words, "Matt Cartwright is the lucid, passionate and unmistakable voice in Congress of every victim of asbestos poisoning, every community fighting toxic contamination of their water, and every citizen fighting for his or her rights against big money, big business and big government.  If you give a damn about the survival of democracy in America, do something right now to keep Matt Cartwright in Congress."

Please consider making a contribution to Matt Cartwright's campaign. Along with Ted Lieu and Jamie Raskin, he's one of only an even dozen incumbents we've endorsed this year. The other men and women we've endorsed are in blue districts. Matt's PVI is rated R+1.

How The DCCC Is Abandoning Pennsylvania Democrats Once Again

How an incompetent DCCC has reshaped the political landscape of Pennsylvania

Pennsylvania, one of the most egregiously gerrymandered states in the country, has 18 congressional seats. Even though it's a blue state-- Obama beat McCain 3,192,316 (54.7%) to 2,586,496 (44.3%) and beat Romney 2,907,448 (52.0%) to 2,619,58 (46.8%); Bob Casey beat Tom Smith for the U.S. Senate seat in 2012 53.6% to 44.7% and the most recent statewide race saw Tom Wolf wipe out incumbent Governor Tom Corbett 55-45%-- only 5 congressional seats are held by Democrats now!

In 2006, the congressional delegation reflected the state's partisan split far more accurately: there were 12 Democrats in Congress and 7 Republicans. The incompetence and grotesque corruption of Chris Van Hollen and Steve Israel and their staff guaranteed the portion of Democratic seats in the state would fall from 12 of 19 to 5 of 18. (This has been their impact coast to coast from the Canadian border to the Mexican border.) They like to use gerrymandering as an excuse, but it's a false excuse. The DCCC routinely ignores districts that favor Democrats if the locals have the temerity to nominate a progressive rather than a corrupt DCCC conservative.

This cycle in Pennsylvania-- with it's 13 Republican-seats in what looks to be a huge year, with Bernie or Hillary at the top of the ticket, likely against some crackpot like Herr Trumpf or nut-case Dominionist Ted Cruz and Joe Sestak challenging failed right-wing Senator Pat Toomey, a Wall Street puppet ($6,353,491)-- the DCCC is challenging 3 Republicans. In order of interest, they're looking whomever the GOP nominates to fill Mike Fitzpatrick's seat in Bucks County (almost certainly the NRCC shill, Mike's uptight little brother Brian, who's counting on people mixing him up with his brother), Ryan Costello and Pat Meehan. In PA-08 (Fitzpatrick's seat), they recruited an establishment-favored typical DCCC conservaDem, Steve Santassiero, but backed away when he proved lazy, dumb and unable to raise and money. It looks more likely that the more progressive Shaunghnessy Naughton will win the primary in this seat Obama won against McCain, 53-46%. 

The DCCC recruited a wealthy entrepreneur/pastor, Bill Golderer, as their candidate against Pat Meehan in the Delaware County 'burbs south and west of Philly (PA-07), although there's a real grassroots progressive running, an Elizabeth Warren-type college professor, Mary Ellen Balchunis and she-- rather than he-- has the backing of the local Democratic parties. PA-07 is another instance of the DCCC recruiting their idea of a candidate and foisting him on the locals. 

They recruited a conservative Republican, a party switcher, Mike Parrish, to run in PA-06 (an oddly shaped monstrosity that includes pieces of Chester, Berks and Montgomery counties) but Parrish must have studied in the same how-to-lose school as Santassiero and the DCCC cooled on him as well. A progressive grassroots activist, Lindy Li is also running and she seems to be generating more enthusiasm than the ex-Republican. But those 3 Philly-area districts are the only ones-- of the 13 held by Republicans-- the DCCC is even bothering to contest.

There are no Democratic candidates running against Mike Kelly (PA-03), Bill Shuster (PA-09), Tom Marino (PA-10) or Tim Murphy (PA-18), so no one even building for a future run the way Mary Ellen did against Meehan in 2014 when she got zero help from the DCCC but still managed to bring in nearly 90,000 votes, something she's using as a base of support for her campaign this cycle. It doesn't take a brain surgeon.

But even in the districts where there are Democrats running, like in PA-05, where Kerith Strano Taylor is taking on Glenn Thompson again, the DCCC is ignoring the races, the talent they have in the most abundance. They are also ignoring Josh Burkholder's campaign against Scott Perry (PA-04), Michael Marsicano's campaign against racist/xenophobic freak-show Lou Barletta (PA-11), Steve Larchuk's race against Keith Rothfus (PA-12), the race to replace retiring Joe Pitts (PA-16), where Christina Hartman and Gary Wegman are in a primary-- and where Obama nearly beat McCain 50-49%. But the worst case of DCCC malfeasance is in the Lehigh Valley (PA-15), where Charlie Dent is being challenged by Democrat Rick Daugherty, who did reasonably well against Dent in 2012. Four years before that Obama won the district 52-47%. But the DCCC is uninterested in getting involved.

So while the DCCC gets ready to repeat every mistake they've made in every cycle in recent memory-- recruiting awful candidates that the base doesn't relate to and leaving dozens of seats uncontested-- the NRCC is being far more aggressive and targeting way more House seats, including seats where they know they will lose in November but hope to pick up in 2018-- the kind of long-range thinking imbeciles like Chris Van Hollen, Steve Israel and Ben Ray Lujan are incapable of.

Do you want progressive candidates who can win? Here are 18, only one of whom the DCCC is even supporting at all. If you'd like to help any of them win, please tap the thermometer. Maybe there's even one near you.

UPDATE: Another District In Play?

Pennsylvania's most progressive House Member, Matt Cartwright, just endorsed Christina Hartman in PA-16, which includes Pennsylvania Dutch Country, all of Lancaster and some of blue Reading. Although the district is R+4, Obama won it in 2008 and held Romney to 52% in 2012. If the DCCC were less incompetent and actually got behind Hartman, there's a good chance she would beat likely GOP nominee, state Sen. Lloyd Smucker, an extremist nut who bears a chunk of responsibility for shutting down the state government-- the last thing we need in DC. "With a name like Smucker, he’s got to be a turd" would be a great campaign poster for her... though maybe not in Lancaster County.

Crucial Primaries Mañana In Georgia, Kentucky And Pennsylvania

Let me save Pennsylvania for the end, since that's the one with Democrats. Georgia and Kentucky are Republican affairs, although who the GOP voters pick in each state may influence the outcome of the November elections-- and the control of the U.S. Senate. We'll start with Georgia's 7 dwarves running for the open red Senate seat that conservative Democrat, Sam Nunn's daughter, thinks she has a chance to win. She doesn't really have a chance-- although flawed and irrelevant polling consistently predicts she does. Greg Bluestein in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution: "Michelle Nunn, the Democratic front-runner in the Senate race, has built leads against each of the five top GOP Senate contenders in a potential November matchup, though her lead against businessman David Perdue is particularly narrow… But it’s important to note that GOP candidates have yet to unleash the brunt of their considerable resources at Democratic rivals. Deal’s campaign has so far ignored Carter in its feel-good ad campaign, and Republican Senate candidates are busy battering each other ahead of the May 20 primary."

The most recent primary polling from Fox shows certain nuts and crackpots beating other nuts and crackpots:

• David Perdue 26%
• Karen Handel 18%
• Jack Kingston: 17%
• Paul Broun: 12%
• Phil Gingrey: 11%
• Other: 3%
• Undecided: 13%

The only real chance Nunn's daughter really has-- despite a lot of wasted energy from delusional Democrats-- would be if dangerous fascist/Bircher Paul Broun won tomorrow. But he won't. And neither will she. Her excruciatingly tepid, conservative campaign not going to motive enough Democratic base voters to bother turning out in November, despite the millions the DSCC and their allied organizations waste on the election. Lots of ugly Republican Civil War ads like this one up this week:



The video way up top shows the two front-runners flatly stating-- probably dishonestly-- that they will not vote for the repulsive GOP leader, Mitch McConnell if he's reelected and wants to be GOP Leader again. And, in all likelihood, McConnell will win his primary tomorrow. The most recent polling shows him beating teabagger Matt Bevin 55-35%.

Heading into the final weekend before the 05/20/14 Kentucky primary, incumbent GOP Senator Mitch McConnell soundly defeats more conservative Republican challenger Matt Bevin, according to the latest Bluegrass Poll, conducted by SurveyUSA for the Louisville Courier-Journal, WHAS-TV, The Lexington Herald Leader, and WKYT-TV. It's McConnell 55%, Bevin 35%.

50% of Republicans say Matt Bevin is too inexperienced and would harm KY's ability to get things from DC, compared to 38% who say that Matt Bevin is the fresh face needed to shake things up in Washington. 38% of Republicans say McConnell has been in office too long and it's time for him to go, compared to 55% of Republicans who say that McConnell's expertise and seniority are important for Kentucky to have in Washington DC. 51% of Republicans say McConnell has done too little to stop federal spending, 33% say he has done the right amount. 54% of Republicans say McConnell has done too little to stop the Affordable Care Act, 31% say he has done the right amount.

Assuming McConnell emerges triumphant from Tuesday's primary, and looking ahead to the 11/04/14 general election, the forecast is cloudy for the Senate Minority Leader, who stands to become Majority Leader should he hold his seat and should Republicans capture control of the Upper Chamber.

Today, it's even-steven, McConnell 42% vs 43% for his lesser known but well-financed Democratic challenger, Alison Lundergan Grimes. These results are a nominal 3 points more favorable to McConnell than the most recent Bluegrass Poll, released 02/04/14. That poll was conducted of registered voters; this poll is of likely voters. Today, Grimes has built a narrow coalition of Democrats (74% support) and moderates (60%). The rest of her support is below 50% (women 45%, greater Louisville 48%). McConnell holds on because he is backed by conservatives (68%), Republicans (69%), and because where he trails, it is narrowly, and by single digits, such as among Independents, where McConnell is down 38% to 32%. 6-months till votes are counted, even in the face of these poll numbers, McConnell cannot be underestimated. The national Republican Party is not prepared to lose his seat; every last dollar will be spent to keep it.

Among all registered voters:


• Grimes has a Plus 14 Job Approval as KY Secretary of State: 46% approve of the job she's doing, 32% disapprove.


• McConnell has a Minus 22 Job Approval as KY's senior Senator: 34% approve of the job he's doing, 56% disapprove.


• Grimes favorability is Plus 8 (35% view her favorably, 27% view her unfavorably).


• McConnell's favorability is Minus 20 (29% favorable, 49% unfavorable).


• Bevin's favorability is Minus 3 (22% favorable, 25% unfavorable).

So far, McConnell has spent $11,379,032 on this race and Bevin has spent $3,340,522. This week, the NRA spent $$99,073 bolstering McConnell. The Credit Union National Association, one of the nation's most corrupt Big Bucks players spent over $350,000 last week to push two slimy candidates who have proven records of selling out their constituents in favor of the banksters, McConnell ($156,394) and fake Democrat Pete Aguilar ($197,189). Americans for Tax Reform kicked in another $37,500 this week for McConnell. In contrast the Freedomworks fire-breathers spent $2,154 trying to prop up Bevin's disintegrating campaign. McConnell and his allies have unlimited millions to start deploying against Grimes on Wednesday.

Democratic voters in Pennsylvania seem well on the way to nominating Tom Wolf for governor tomorrow, the progressive alternative to EMILY's List's horribly flawed conservative shill Allyson Schwartz, despite the Beltway pundits having practically declared her the winner even before she declared her candidacy. The punditocracy also heavily backed Marjorie Margolies-Mezvinsky (the outrageously corrupt Clinton in-law) in PA-13 and Steve Israel's CIA spy/pro-fracker Kevin Strouse in PA-08. Both are poised to lose tomorrow, although both races are too close to call and will depend on robust progressive turnout.

DWT recommendations for tomorrow:

• PA-13- Daylin Leach
• PA-08- Shaughnessy Naughton
• PA Gov- Tom Wolf
• PA Lt. Gov- Mark Smith

Will Steve Israel's PA-08 CIA Agent, Kevin Strouse, Withdraw From His Congressional Race Over The Weekend?

I wondered why Steve Israel and his corrupt operatives at the DCCC didn't jump all over the story about Republican crooks Michael Grimm and Aaron Schock illegally trading maxed out donors to circumvent campaign finance regulations. Was Israel too busy chasing Pinellas County NAACP President Manuel Sykes out of the FL-13 Democratic primary so he could run a sleazy Republican crony instead? That wasn't it and now I do know why Israel ignored that scandal-- he was directing a nearly identical scheme among-- even more shady-- his own stable of worthless corrupt recruits. Pelosi is now countenancing criminal activities from her DCCC chief, It's not just about losing House seats-- an Israel forte-- but about unethical behavior that rivals the GOPs.

Let's start with a look at a widely sourced article in the Philadelphia Inquirer by Chris Palmer and Jonathan Tamari, who fingered Israel recruit and "ex"-CIA agent Kevin Strouse as the source of the scam.

As Kevin Strouse jumped into a high-profile congressional race in Bucks County, his parents sent $10,400 last June to the campaign of U.S. Rep. Ami Bera, a California Democrat in another closely contested district.

Two days later, Strouse's campaign got the same amount, $10,400, from Bera's parents.

The pattern was repeated at least three other times last year, campaign finance records show. In each, Strouse's parents-- who had never before donated to federal candidates beyond Pennsylvania-- sent money to Democrats in tight congressional races in Colorado, Florida, and Illinois.

Days before or after, those candidates' parents sent nearly identical contributions-- usually for the maximum allowed-- to Strouse's campaign.

What Palmer and Tamari have no way of knowing is that the candidates involved in the scam are all Israel New Dem "mystery meat" recruits, more of his fatally flawed, conservative candidates like Ed Jany and Kevin Strouse-- Patrick Murphy (FL), Andrew Romanoff (CO) and Ann Callis (IL). "Exactly how," the two reporters ask, "the parents of candidates in far-flung congressional races aimed nearly matching donations at one another's children is unclear." Maybe Pelosi should clear it up for us? Is this what she meant when she admiringly called him "reptilian" when she was truing to defend appointing such a corrupt character to a high position? Israel and his den of crooks at the DCCC are, needless to say, stonewalling.

Strouse, his campaign and his parents did not respond to multiple requests for interviews, including two left at Robert and Norma Strouse's home in Glenmoore. Parents of two other candidates-- one in Illinois and the other in California-- hung up when contacted by the Inquirer. Two others did not return calls left for comment.

The only clear link between the parents is that their children are each running in House districts deemed priorities by national Democrats.

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee on Monday declined to discuss the contributions or say if the party had a role introducing the parents or directing their donations.

Instead, it released a two-line statement that said: "Our Red to Blue and Emerging candidates are on the vanguard of the fight to put solutions ahead of reckless brinkmanship and fight for middle-class families. As the top tier pickup opportunities in the country, these races generate tremendous enthusiasm from our allies and candidates' own networks."

Strouse, 34, a handpicked DCCC candidate who moved to the district from the District of Columbia last year, is locked in a fight with businesswoman Shaughnessy Naughton, 35, to be the party's nominee in the Eighth District.

…Strouse's parents have given $49,400 to eight Democrats running in priority House races this year - not counting $10,400 to their son. The parents of at least four of those candidates donated $28,400 to Strouse.

In almost every case, the donations were dated just days before the campaigns were scheduled to file finance reports to the FEC-- a time candidates and committees traditionally ramp up fund-raising so they can boast about swollen war chests.

In June, Robert Strouse sent $5,200 to the campaign of U.S. Rep. Patrick Murphy (D., Fla.). (The Floridian is no relation to the former Bucks County congressman with the same name.) Four days later, Murphy's father, Thomas P. Murphy Jr., sent an identical campaign contribution to Kevin Strouse.

In September and December, Strouse's parents sent checks to the campaign of Ann Callis, a Democratic challenger in Illinois. Within days, Callis' parents sent nearly identical amounts back to Strouse's campaign.

Reached at home Sunday night, Lance Callis at first explained the donation by saying Strouse might have sent him political information he agreed with. But he declined to elaborate and hung up.

Robert Strouse also gave $5,200 - again the maximum-- to House candidate Andrew Romanoff of Colorado on Oct. 3. That was sent four days after Romanoff's mother had contributed $2,600 to the Strouse campaign.

For Romanoff's mother, Gayle Caplan, it was the first time she had given to a federal candidate other than her son and President Obama. When contacted at home in California on Sunday, Caplan said, "I don't talk to reporters," and hung up.

Bera's parents were not home and could not be reached. The Bera, Callis, and Romanoff campaigns did not respond to requests for comment Monday. Murphy's campaign declined to comment.

Strouse's parents have also donated to four other top-tier Democrats who, according to FEC records, do not appear to have given back to Kevin Strouse.

The other parents have also been generous. Like the Strouses, the Beras and Lance Callis have also given to multiple campaigns this cycle, usually helping candidates named as Democratic priorities for 2014. All three families, for example, gave to U.S. Rep. Raul Ruiz (D., Calif.).

The other gained candidates include Israel recruits Rocky Lara (NM), John Lewis (MT), and Sean Patrick Maloney (NY). The anti-fracking candidate in the Bucks County race whose campaign Israel is trying to sabotage, Shaughnessy Naughton, has asked Strouse to explain how these shady contributions were coordinated. "Was there a quid pro quo?" she asked. She also called on him to return the roughly $28,400 in parental contributions if they were part of a plan to get around donation limits. "Frankly," she said, "if it's not illegal, it certainly seems like it should be." And if it was unethical for Grimm and Schock, this looks 10 times worse. There were so many shady contributions from Strouse's parents-- one see why he became a spy now-- that I couldn't even capture them all on aq sceenshot. Here are a sample:

no progressives on this list

Fracking... And Our Cynical Elites

The most compelling television I came across last night was the above opener to Chris Hayes' show. It's a jaw-dropping look at the "not in my backyard" ethos of our political elites. They are more than happy to frack up Oklahoma to the point of causing hundreds of earthquakes in a matter of days, pollute the drinking water in West Virginia so that hundreds of people are made sick before hundreds of thousands of people have no water to use at all, and make the water in Pennsylvania flammable. They have the power to do these things because of unfair policies the politicians they own legislate.

But, as Hayes pointed out last night, when fracking comes to their idyllic neighborhoods… just watch the piece. It's another one for a modern day Madame Defarge to take note of. Keep in mind… Pennsylvania voters dumped corrupt fracking-backer Tim Holden in 2012 and replaced him with progressive environmental champion Matt Cartwright. This year the slime balls who run the DCCC are again trying to elect a pro-fracking politician, ex-CIA agent Kevin Strouse, instead of reasonable and independent-minded scientist Shaughnessy Naughton (PA-08). The DCCC is up against a very educated electorate in Bucks Countyand their shill may be in for as unpleasant a surprise as Tim Holden was last cycle. This was from a guest post Naughton wrote for DWT almost half a year ago:

Cynical DCCC bumper sticker. Does Strouse have one on his car?

Basing National Policy On Credible Evidence-Based Research
-by Shaughnessy Naughton

When it comes to fracking, our policies on drilling ignore its potential public health and environmental risks. To me, that’s crazy! We should not be risking our community’s health just to make a profit. It’s simply wrong. There’s so much we don’t know, including whether or not gas and brine can make a path to the surface and what kind of seismic activity fracking causes.

This issue is particularly potent in my district, which has the Delaware River running along it. The River contributes to the entire region: at 330 miles it is the longest American river east of the Mississippi, providing drinking water for more than 15 million people, as well as water needed for industry, and irrigation for Pennsylvania’s important farming regions. Moreover, the Delaware River basin is prone to severe floods, so chemical storage near the source of so much drinking water is a serious hazard.

Fracking uses a toxic chemical cocktail called fracking fluid, but companies refuse to say what exact contaminants are in the fluid, claiming that the contents are proprietary information. The Marcellus Shale, Pennsylvania’s largest drilling site, has unknown levels of radon, a radioactive gas that causes lung cancer. Rather than allowing fracking companies to hide behind the cloak of “trade secrets,” I support full disclosure and transparency of the chemicals that drillers inject underground.

My primary opponent, who moved to Pennsylvania from DC earlier this year, doesn’t seem too concerned about fracking. When asked about his views on climate change, he recently told a local newspaper “I support natural gas drilling.”

Well, I don’t agree. It would be irresponsible to frack locally and even remotely threaten a source of drinking water for 15 million people. In fact, we already have a moratorium on fracking in Pennsylvania’s Bucks and Montgomery counties passed in 2012. The fracking ban in the two counties operates as both a state and federal moratorium; the federal moratorium came in 2009, when the administrators of the Delaware River Basin Commission (DRBC) determined they needed to ban fracking along the length of the River until guidelines were drawn up.

We need to keep the federal ban in place, and make sure that Obama doesn't succumb to the energy lobby's pressure to lift the moratorium. In fact, I support making the moratorium a permanent ban. My opponent, on the other hand, clearly seems to think that there is a “right way” to risk our public health.

We as a country need to stop taking short-term gains in exchange for long-term losses. We need to start investing seriously in research on clean energy alternatives like wind, solar, and rain energy. Most importantly, we need to start basing our policies on scientific facts.

Would Republicans String Up The Koch Brothers If Oklahoma Disappears Into A Giant Sink Hole?

In the video above, the relationship between swarms of Oklahoma earthquakes and fracking, seems obvious. Koch brothers-protected fracking is starting to devastate a wide swathe of the middle of the country-- and Republicans are willfully oblivious to the dangers their ideological policy agenda is causing in red states like Oklahoma, Texas, Arkansas and Kansas.

Whether those stresses are natural or triggered by human activity is currently being studied.

“You can't not ever connect an individual earthquake to an act of drilling or waste water injection. However, I think it's counter intuitive to think there's not some relation,” said Lewchuk.

Monday, the governor of Kansas named a task force to study if oil and gas activities can cause earthquakes, calling it "a matter of public safety." Some of the quakes picked up by seismographs in Oklahoma are centered near the Kansas border. The Kansas task force will present its findings to the governor in April.

Texas is also now investigating its quakes. In the past few months, dozens of quakes have rattled cities in the Dallas-Fort Worth and north to the Red River. Texas' Railroad Commission is working with the USGS to find the cause.

Oklahoma City-based Chesapeake Energy is being taken to court for allegedly causing earthquakes. Twenty-eight homeowners from Arkansas claim the company's injection wells caused thousands of earthquakes. As a result, they claim their homes have been significantly damaged.

I'd like to introduce Tom Steyer to Tom Guild. But I only know the latter Tom. This morning that latter Tom-- Time Guild, a candidate for congress in a district that has been wracked with earthquakes this week-- told me that "There is growing concern in Central Oklahoma over the increasing frequency and strength of earthquakes. This is historically unusual for this part of the country, and seems to parallel increased horizontal drilling in the state. We need to get to the bottom of the cause(s) for this disconcerting phenomenon and do whatever is reasonable and necessary to protect the people of Oklahoma. If this is scientifically confirmed to be manmade in whole or in part, we need to put in place any reasonable and necessary regulations to ensure the safety and well being of our people."

As the NY Times explained this morning, the former Tom, is "a billionaire retired investor is forging plans to spend as much as $100 million during the 2014 election, seeking to pressure federal and state officials to enact climate change measures through a hard-edge campaign of attack ads against governors and lawmakers." So far, a great deal of his political war chest-- $11 million-- has been spent to elect astounding corrupt corporate whore Terry McAuliffe governor of Virginia. Let's hope he'll let Tom Steyer call the shots on issues of climate change. According to reporter Nick Confessore, Steyer "is rallying other deep-pocketed donors, seeking to build a war chest that would make his political organization, NextGen Climate Action, among the largest outside groups in the country, similar in scale to the conservative political network overseen by Charles and David Koch." He put up $50 million of his own money and asked other super-rich folks concerned with the destruction of the earth by the bad rich people to pony up a matching $50 million. In the battle between well-meaning and evil billionaires… well I'd rather see Citizens United struck down and public financing of elections enacted.

“A small number of the richest individuals in America are attempting to use their enormous wealth to purchase government decisions to advance their own personal interests,” said Fred Wertheimer, president of Democracy 21, a group that favors tighter limits on money in politics. “This is about as far away as we can get from ‘representative government.’ ” Mr. Steyer poured tens of millions of dollars into a successful 2012 ballot initiative in California that eliminated a loophole in the state’s corporate income tax and dedicated some of the resulting revenue to clean-energy projects. He also has helped finance opposition to the Keystone XL pipeline, appearing in a series of self-funded 90-second ads seeking to stop the project.

Targets include the governor’s race in Florida, where the incumbent, Rick Scott, a first-term Republican, has said he does not believe that science has established that climate change is man-made. Mr. Steyer’s group is also looking at the Senate race in Iowa, in the hope that a win for the Democratic candidate, Representative Bruce Braley, an outspoken proponent of measures to limit climate change, could help shape the 2016 presidential nominating contests.

…This month, NextGen asked supporters to pick one congressional candidate, from five running this year, for the group to target in its next ads. Four of the five candidates were Republicans, including Senator Marco Rubio of Florida. But the fifth was a vulnerable Democratic incumbent, Senator Mary L. Landrieu of Louisiana, who has close ties to the oil and gas industries and has been an outspoken supporter of the Keystone pipeline.

It is unclear how aggressively his group will move against other Senate Democrats: Asked whether Democratic control of the Senate was necessary to advance his climate agenda, Mr. Steyer said, “As long as we have this partisan divide on energy and climate, it’s got to be important.”

But he is also seeking to upend the partisan split that has come to infuse the climate debate. In their advertising and research, Mr. Steyer and his aides have sought to craft appeals that would reach beyond affluent white liberals on the coasts. Ads in California were tailored to Hispanic voters by emphasizing the negative health impacts of power plant emissions. In the Virginia governor’s race, NextGen sought to show that a Democrat could win with a message emphasizing “green” job creation over one emphasizing threats to the state’s coal industry.

David Topper, a New York private equity investor who attended the meeting at Mr. Steyer’s ranch, said: “You need to be agnostic as to party. If I find someone who has the right position on climate change, do I care if he owns six guns? Not at all.”

Unlike some on the left, Mr. Steyer has embraced the political toolbox that was opened to wealthy donors and other interests in the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision, which made it easier for businesses, unions and rich individuals to pour unlimited money into elections.

Meanwhile, the "imperial presidency" the Republicans never stop whining about lately, is taking some baby steps-- even as they prepare to green-light the Keystone XL Pipeline and destroy President Obama's legacy the way the War in Vietnam destroyed Lyndon Johnson's. This is the Good News Bears/finger in the dike story the White House sent out this morning:

In his State of the Union address, the President outlined a comprehensive agenda to make America a magnet for middle class jobs and business investment. The President highlighted the autoworker, who, implementing the Administration’s historic fuel economy standards, “fine-tuned some of the best, most fuel-efficient cars in the world, and did his part to help America wean itself off foreign oil.” And the President pledged, “in the coming months” to “build on that success by setting new standards for our trucks, so we can keep driving down oil imports and what we pay at the pump.” The President also called on Congress to do its part “by putting people to work building fueling stations that shift more cars and trucks from foreign oil to American natural gas.” Today, the President laid out additional details for his plan to improve the fuel efficiency of American trucks-- bolstering energy security, cutting carbon pollution, and spurring manufacturing innovation.

  •         Directing the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Department of Transportation (DOT) to Set the Next Round of Fuel Efficiency Standards for Medium- and Heavy-Duty Vehicles. Today, the President is directing the EPA and the DOT’s National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) to develop and issue the next phase of medium- and heavy-duty vehicle fuel efficiency and greenhouse gas standards by March 2016. Under this timeline, the agencies are expected to issue a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) by March 2015. This second round of fuel efficiency standards will build on the first-ever standards for medium- and heavy-duty vehicles (model years 2014 through 2018), which were proposed and finalized by this Administration and will save vehicle owners and operators an estimated $50 billion in fuel costs and save a projected 530 million barrels of oil.

  •         Partnering with Private-Sector Leaders to Deploy Advanced Vehicles. In addition, the President highlighted the success of the National Clean Fleets Partnership that he launched to speed the deployment of clean, energy-efficient vehicles and the infrastructure to support their use. This public- private partnership helps the nation’s largest fleet operators reduce diesel and gasoline use in their fleets by incorporating alternative fuels, electric vehicles and fuel-saving measures. To date, 23 major national companies, such as ARAMARK, Coca-Cola, Staples, UPS, AT&T, Enterprise Holdings, and Waste Management have joined the National Clean Fleets Partnership. Collectively, the National Clean Fleets Partners operate more than one million commercial vehicles nationwide. The President has directed his Department of Energy to provide each company that wants to partner with specialized resources, technical expertise and support in developing a comprehensive strategy to reduce fuel use and achieve greater efficiency and cost savings.

  •         Expanding Fuel Choices for American Drivers. In addition to taking executive action to make America more energy independent and cut carbon pollution, the President is also renewing his call for Congress to end subsidies to oil and gas companies and create an Energy Security Trust Fund to fund research and development for advanced vehicle technologies. And he is proposing to support investment in advanced vehicles and infrastructure through a new tax credit and an extension of tax credits to support cellulosic biofuels.

Let's hope Landrieu is at least a warning to Democrats that people take this crap seriously. But just in case Steyer's $100 million goes to a bunch of corporatist whores like McAuliffe, which is what I expect-- and not into any actual progressives like Tom Guild-- you can contribute $5 or $10 to his grassroots effort here. What Steyer is doing in amazing and noble. If we expect billionaires to save us, we might as well discard our democracy altogether. And, by the way, at a debate in Bucks County Monday night, the independent Democrat, Shaughnessy Naughton, went after the garden variety ex-CIA agent the DCCC recruited, Kevin Strouse, on the fracking issue.

"The 8th district needs a leader who understands the value of the Delaware," Naughton added. "Mike Fitzpatrick has a 25% rating from the League of Conservation Voters and Kevin Strouse wants to let the frackers decide if they should frack. I am the only candidate in this race who has been willing to stand up and say, 'Not on my watch.'"

In August of last year, Strouse was quoted in a local newspaper as supporting natural gas drilling. [Midweek Wire 8/28/13] At the debate, Strouse changed his position and said that while he supports the current moratorium on fracking, which is set to expire in 2018, he is willing to “let the experts decide” on whether or not fracking would have environmental consequences.

Strouse’s campaign has received at least $10,400 from Energy Capital Partners, a private equity firm that invests heavily in fracking projects across the country.

"The 8th District deserves a strong, progressive voice that won't be influenced by whichever special interest group can write the biggest check," said Josh Morrow, Naughton's campaign manager. "The Delaware River is one of the region's most important resources, and Shaughnessy is the only candidate in this race who will fight to keep it clean."

"The Delaware River is one of Bucks County’s-- and Pennsylvania’s-- most valuable resources and provides drinking water to more than 15 million people," Naughton said. "The general public still doesn't know what chemicals are used in fracking, and I’m not willing to take that gamble with the purity of our drinking water."

Democratic Congressional Opportunities In Southeast Pennsylvania-- IF Steve Israel Doesn't Blow It Again

Do these protesters need to show up at Steve Israel's house?

The suburbs north of Philadelphia look promising for Democrats this year. First and foremost, Wall Street-owned New Dem Allyson Schwartz (PA-13) is leaving Congress and is likely to be replaced by the state legislature's liberal lion, Montgomery County Senator Daylin Leach. Conservative Democrats have their own ridiculous candidates, a corrupt Clinton mother-in-law whose only compelling reason for running seems to be to institute chained CPI and reduce benefits to seniors (Hoyer's candidate), and Philly-boss backed anti-Choice hack Brendan Boyle. But that's a primary and a potential pick-up for progressives, but a red-to-blue seat.

Steve Israel has failed miserably to recruit winning candidates against vulnerable Republican incumbents but Democrats had great news yesterday when Jim Gerlach announced he wouldn't be running for reelection in PA-06 (after 6 terms). The district, which has a PVI of R+2 after partisan redistricting that made it slightly safer for a Republican to hold, contains parts of 4 counties: Chester, Berks, Montgomery and Lebanon. Montgomery and Chester are friendliest to Democrats and it wouldn't be a stretch to take back that seat with the right candidate. Look at this PPP survey showing how vulnerable Gerlach was. The DCCC ignored it:

Now it looks like either Bob Casey's brother, Chris Casey, or current gubernatorial candidate Katie McGinty, may want to jump into the open-seat race. This is a great pick-up opportunity and No doubt Israel is scrambling to find a corrupt conservative to run.

East of PA-06 and sharing a around the Green Lane Reservoir and Schwenksville, we have another vulnerable Republican-held seat, PA-08, Mike Fitzpatrick's seat, that extends east through Doylestown and down into Bensalem and Levittown. Basically, though, excluding a small piece of Montgomery County, this is the Bucks County district. This one has an R+1 PVI and was recently held by Blue Dog Patrick Murphy. The DCCC ran out and recruited another of their untrustworthy empty suits, ex-CIA agent, Kevin Strouse. This district could be won but Steve Israel is likely to muck it up in his relentless jihad against grassroots candidates. As we pointed out last September, Strouse is a pro-fracking candidate and, like most voters in Bucks County, Shaughnessy Naughton, is a scientist and an anti-fracking candidate. Environmentalists abhor Strouse, of course, and have largely been endorsing Naughton, who Israel has been bad-mouthing to Democratic donors. For example, Michael Mann, author of The Hockey Stick and the Climate Wars and a Distinguished Professor at Penn State, gave Naughton the kind of fulsome backing scientists have been awarding her:

I don’t normally do this, but our country is at a crossroads and, in my view, science is under attack.

Our scientific community has been generally loath to delve into the political realm. Meanwhile we have elected officials that are science deniers; they cut funding for scientific research and seek to politicize basic facts.

I’ve seen this firsthand. In 2005, the Attorney General of Virginia opened a civil investigation against me because he didn’t agree with my scientific findings on climate change, threatening academic freedom for the sake of promoting anti-science bias.

But there is a bright spot. I recently met Shaughnessy Naughton, a chemist and businesswoman from Southeastern Pennsylvania who is running for Congress on a pro-science platform.  She understands the scientific evidence behind pressing issues like the environment and healthcare, and she promises to fight to invest in scientific research funding to promote discovery, help grow our economy, and create jobs.  And, she understands the importance of making sure that we have strong STEM education, from elementary school all the way up.

Unfortunately, some traditional campaign donors don’t understand why it is so important to restore and grow the budgets of the NIH, NSF, and other sources of federal funding for scientific research.

But, as scientists, we do. We know the difference science can make in shaping a positive future for our country, and for that reason I believe we have an obligation to support a candidate like Shaughnessy who shares our commitment to fact-driven decision making…Take a look at her science policy plan here.

Just as a report from the AP was released warning on the dangers of fracking to drinking water, Strouse reiterated his pro-fracking agenda. Earlier today, Naughton drew a firm line between her own science-based position and Strouse's corrupt vision for an end to the fracking moratorium in Bucks County. She again told voters that she wants to "permanently ban hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, on the Delaware River Basin."

She cited the newly released AP review of drilling-related complaints [linked above], which found that “Pennsylvania received 398 complaints in 2013 alleging that oil or natural gas drilling polluted or otherwise affected private water wells, compared with 499 in 2012. The Pennsylvania complaints can include allegations of short-term diminished water flow, as well as pollution from stray gas or other substances. More than 100 cases of pollution were confirmed over the past five years.”

What’s more, a new study undertaken by researchers from Princeton, Columbia, and MIT showed that in Pennsylvania the proximity to fracking sites increased the likelihood of low birth weight by more than half and doubled the chance of a low Apgar score. [Bloomberg 1/4/14]

“I’ve said it before and I’m saying it again, we need a permanent ban on fracking along the Delaware River Basin,” said Naughton, referring to the Delaware River, which runs along Bucks County. “We’re talking about potentially contaminating the source of drinking water for fifteen million people. On top of that we should be thinking about the impact on the local tourism economy. Who is going to want to stay at an inn on the historic Delaware River if it’s polluted? We’re talking about a $877.3 million industry that supports more than 11,600 jobs. This isn’t complicated. It’s common sense."

For some odd reason, the DCCC is sticking with a male CIA agent who backs fracking. Go figure!


UPDATE: Naughton Isn't Letting This Rest

This morning Shaughnessy Naughton sent out a press release demanding that the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) and the administration of Governor Tom Corbett provide more transparency on fracking-related water contamination in Pennsylvania, and, in particular, the Delaware River Basin.

“It’s shocking to me that the one entity in the state that’s supposed to protect our environment is fighting efforts to learn about the impact of fracking,” said Naughton. “I’m calling on the DEP and the Corbett Administration to improve their transparency. We do not know enough about the effects of fracking, and the new information we are getting does not look good. We need more information, not less. The residents of Pennsylvania deserve better from their state government.”

By contrast, Naughton’s opponent in the Democratic primary in Pennsylvania’s Eighth Congressional District, Kevin Strouse, told Midweek Wire, “I support natural gas drilling.”

Another Ivy League Elitist, Kevin Strouse

But not good enough for Kevin Strouse???

It wasn't more than a couple weeks ago that people were snickering about Princeton alum Ted Cruz's elitist attacks on students from "lesser" Ivy League schools. GQ broke the story but it got pretty wide play considering how abruptly Cruz shoved himself into the national spotlight with his jihad to shut down the government. For instance, the NY Daily News was quick to label him an elitist

Ted Cruz might play a down-home Texan but turns out the firebrand Republican was an elitist Ivy Leaguer back in the day.

The Princeton grad held the bar high while a student at Harvard Law, refusing to study with pariahs who hadn’t done their underground at Harvard, Princeton or Yale, according to a GQ profile of the first-term Senator.

“He said he didn’t want anybody from ‘minor Ivies’ like Penn or Brown,” Damon Watson, a law school roommate of Cruz, told the magazine… It’s not clear if Cruz ever cozied up with McCain.

McCain attended the United States Naval Academy and has no Ivy League stripes to his name.

Of course, people can say that was a long, long, long time ago or that how could anyone expect Cruz to turn out differently considering his sociopathic father, Rafael (who was rushing around the country this week threatening to work on primaries against the 25 Senate Republicans-- i.e., most Senate Republicans-- who ignored or disdained his son's antics and voted against shutting down the government).

The ex-CIA analyst the DCCC dug up to run against Michael Fitzpatrick in Bucks County, Pennsylvania (PA-08), Kevin Strouse, isn't as old as Cruz but he's just as much an Ivy snob. Or maybe he just hates women? But he sure hated Barnard women when he was at Columbia University! I remember that some of the smartest and most accomplished women in my high school, including the valedictorian went to Barnard. This article that Strouse wrote for the student paper, the Spectator sounds host elitist and misogynistic to me, every bit as vile as Cruz. No wonder Steve Israel recruited him!

Student government has done some fine things lately. With the urging of many concerned-- and scared-- students, our elected representatives voted to keep Barnard out of our dorms. Phew.

I don't think we should stop there. I know plenty of Barnard people living in our dorms right now. I think we need to organize a vigilante squad and run them off campus, back to that school of theirs. When we've done that, we'll go to the classrooms and purge them from there, because we can't have them polluting our education. Finally, we'll lock all the gates and only give keys to Columbia students. Only then can Columbia ensure our safety.

I think what the council was trying to reaffirm was that we here at Columbia are a better breed. And some individuals in the student government let their actions illustrate that notion.

Barnard is the most selective women's college in the country and the most difficult of the Seven Sisters to get into. The average GPA of the class of 2013 was 94.6 on a 100-pt. scale and 3.84 on a 4.0 scale. I'm sure none of them are as brilliant and accomplished as Strouse but Barnard alumni include Laurie Anderson, Laura Flanders, Suzanne Vega, Jeane Kirkpatrick, Erica Jong, Christine Wang, Maria Hinojosa, Martha Stewart, Twyla Tharp… and Joan Rivers. In his quest to win a House seat, Strouse is running against… a woman, Shaughnessy Naughton, who Steve Israel is trying to knock out of the primary.

Will Steve Israel Muck Up Democratic Chances To Take Back PA-08 Again?

Shaughnessy Naughton

Although southeast Pennsylvania's 8th congressional district has a small chunk of northern Montgomery County, it is basically the Bucks County district. Along with the neighboring 7th CD, it is the wealthiest party of Pennsylvania, those two districts being the only two in the state with medium household incomes over $70,000. PA-08 is a genuine swing district with a PVI of R+1. Obama beat McCain, 53-46% in 2008 and he and Romney tied 49-49% last year, Romney edging him by a few votes. The incumbent, Mike Fitzpatrick, was elected in 2004, was defeated after one term by Patrick Murphy, who joined the Blue Dog caucus and was defeated-- in a rematch with Fitzpatrick-- in 2010 as part of the Great Blue Dog Apocalypse. Last year the DCCC refused to support the Democratic nominee, Kathy Boockvar and Fitzpatrick outspent her $2,586,004 to $1,443,331 and won 57-43%.

This year, Steve Israel rushed to recruit a more conservative and malleable Democrat for the DCCC, former CIA analyst Kevin Strouse. They failed to contend with the fact that a popular local businesswoman, Shaughnessy Naughton, is also running, breaking a Democratic rule about not interfering in viable primaries. She's a research scientist who has done breast cancer and infectious disease research, as well as drug discovery and is the owner and CEO of a small business, a publishing company located in the district. She tells people, reminiscent of congressional neighbor Rush Holt, that one of the main reasons she's running is because she thinks we need more scientists in politics. "As a chemist, it is incredibly important to me that our national policy is based on credible evidence-based research." I asked her to introduce herself to DWT readers with a guest post about one specific-- and very salient-- issue for her area of Pennsylvania: fracking.

Fitzpatrick hasn't been as conservative on environmental issues as most of his GOP colleagues. At one point he was even endorsed by the Sierra Club. That's good politics because Bucks County is a very environmentally sensitive area. Fracking is a big issue there but the DCCC candidate, Strouse finds himself the odd-man out, backing fracking. In his Master's Thesis, "Russian Natural Gas: Enabler Of Uncooperative Foreign Policy" he supports fracking and in particular the so-called Halliburton loophole technology in Cheney's highly controversial 2005 Energy Bill.

 

Basing National Policy On Credible Evidence-Based Research
-by Shaughnessy Naughton

When it comes to fracking, our policies on drilling ignore its potential public health and environmental risks. To me, that’s crazy! We should not be risking our community’s health just to make a profit. It’s simply wrong. There’s so much we don’t know, including whether or not gas and brine can make a path to the surface and what kind of seismic activity fracking causes.

This issue is particularly potent in my district, which has the Delaware River running along it. The River contributes to the entire region: at 330 miles it is the longest American river east of the Mississippi, providing drinking water for more than 15 million people, as well as water needed for industry, and irrigation for Pennsylvania’s important farming regions. Moreover, the Delaware River basin is prone to severe floods, so chemical storage near the source of so much drinking water is a serious hazard.

Fracking uses a toxic chemical cocktail called fracking fluid, but companies refuse to say what exact contaminants are in the fluid, claiming that the contents are proprietary information. The Marcellus Shale, Pennsylvania’s largest drilling site, has unknown levels of radon, a radioactive gas that causes lung cancer. Rather than allowing fracking companies to hide behind the cloak of “trade secrets,” I support full disclosure and transparency of the chemicals that drillers inject underground.

My primary opponent, who moved to Pennsylvania from DC earlier this year, doesn’t seem too concerned about fracking. When asked about his views on climate change, he recently told a local newspaper “I support natural gas drilling.”

Well, I don’t agree. It would be irresponsible to frack locally and even remotely threaten a source of drinking water for 15 million people. In fact, we already have a moratorium on fracking in Pennsylvania’s Bucks and Montgomery counties passed in 2012. The fracking ban in the two counties operates as both a state and federal moratorium; the federal moratorium came in 2009, when the administrators of the Delaware River Basin Commission (DRBC) determined they needed to ban fracking along the length of the River until guidelines were drawn up.

We need to keep the federal ban in place, and make sure that Obama doesn't succumb to the energy lobby's pressure to lift the moratorium. In fact, I support making the moratorium a permanent ban. My opponent, on the other hand, clearly seems to think that there is a “right way” to risk our public health.

We as a country need to stop taking short-term gains in exchange for long-term losses. We need to start investing seriously in research on clean energy alternatives like wind, solar, and rain energy.  Most importantly, we need to start basing our policies on scientific facts.

I contacted Strouse's campaign for this article as well and a friendly staffer promised to have him call back with his perspective. That hasn't happened. If you'd like to contribute to the candidate who will protect Bucks County from fracking, Shaughnessy's Act Blue page is here. In a district like PA-08, where independents, not base voters, determine who will win, a Democrat supporting fracking will never beat a Republican who opposes it. If Democrats hope to take back the district Shaughnessy Naughton is the candidate who can beat Fitzpatrick. Steve Israel should let district Democrats decide, not try to make that decision based on his own prejudices and preferences for conservative-leaning Democrats.

UPDATE: Israel Sends A Poison Pen Letter

Today Steve Israel, doubling down on parachuting into competitive primaries on behalf of more conservative candidates, sent out a fundraising letter for his handpicked patsy, Kevin Strouse:

As Chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, it’s my job to find the best candidates to run for Congress.

One of our top races is Kevin Strouse in Pennsylvania’s 8th district-- this seat is CRITICAL to winning a Democratic majority.

National Republicans know it too. That’s why shady special interest groups will be targeting Kevin, ready to spend HUGE amounts of cash to buy this seat.

If we are going to win a Democratic majority against the right-wing establishment and all the cash that goes with it, Kevin needs to have a huge showing for Monday’s big FEC fundraising deadline. Will you help him do it?

Please help Kevin have a strong grassroots showing by giving $3 or more before Monday’s critical fundraising deadline.

Every dollar counts, so we need every one of you to step up and give whatever you can.

An outaged friend of mine in Doylestown, a significant (now former) DCCC contributor who got that letter, sent me a steely-eyed e-mail: "Not only are they fundraising for someone who isn't from here and is against the common-sense moratorium on fracking on the Delaware River, but the DCCC is campaigning against the only woman in the race. It's concerning that they are trying to hand pick another male candidate at a time when issues facing women and families are on the chopping block in our nation's capital. I'm convinced. I promise to contribute through Blue America from now on. I can't believe it took so long."