DCCC Helps Blue Dogs, Of Course-- And Kicks Progressive Primary Winners To The Curb

The DCCC got the shitty candidate it wanted in Staten Island, lame Blue Dog Max Rose but, unfortunately for them, so did the GOP. Moderate incumbent Dan Donovan eviscerated jailbird and Mobster Michael "Mikey Suits" Grimm (63.9% to 36.1%), who Rose would have had a chance to beat. Now the only chance Rose has is if an indiscriminate blue wave sweeps over Staten Island.

But within hours of Rose's primary win, the DCCC was up on the air with the ad up top. Someone made a good ad for them, using Donovan’s own words against him: "I’ve supported the president 90% of the time in my votes… I voted seven times to repeal Obamacare." That kind of crap worked in a primary where someone was after him from the right, but NY-11 is a swing district and that kind of extremism is a negative with independents and moderates.

Needless-to-say, the DCCC didn't have any ads up for any of the other primary candidates who won their races Tuesday. They still haven't added Kara Eastman to their red-to-blue program, still pissed off she beat they crap Blue Dog, Brad Ashford, happy to lose a winnable seat rather than help a progressive. Might be the same with Dana Balter in Syracuse (NY-24). They removed Juanita Perez Williams but are refusing to replace her with Balter, who beat Williams 62.6% to 37.4%, a massive defeat. That's how they run the show. They never learn. We're starting up the Abandoned By The DCCC ActBlue page again, for the primary winners, the DCCC is refusing to help. Take a look by tapping on the thermometer on the right. Wow-- all but one of the winning candidates they're ignoring, Mike Siegel, is Texas, is a woman! When will they ever learn? Pete Seeger:

Where have all the flowers gone?
Long time passing
Where have all the flowers gone?
Long time ago
Where have all the flowers gone?
Girls have picked them every one
When will they ever learn?
When will they ever learn?

Racial Anxiety-- Not Economic Anxiety-- Drove 80% Of White Evangelicals To Support Trump

Can you imagine Blue America working with an evangelical group? Stretch your mind. We found one-- or rather, they found us. A few weeks ago Ted Lieu and I had dinner with some evangelical pastors and some of their supporters to discuss their plans for the 2018 election. They feel that evangelicals have been key to Trump's support and they would like to help progressive Democrats and progressive evangelicals connect before the midterms. The organization is Vote Common Good, and the Executive Director is Doug Pagitt, Minneapolis' leading progressive pastor. Today he told us that "We firmly believe that true Christians realize that Trumpism is completely antithetical to anything that Jesus actually stood for. Quoting scripture to justify inhumane policies is not Christianity. We also know that we have the infrastructure and capability to reach this incredibly large portion of the population that the Republican Party has chosen to take for granted and the Democratic Party has decided to ignore. We seek to transcend identity and partisan politics and direct our members to vote for the Common Good."

The Washington Post ran a disturbing piece by Janelle Wong Sunday, Racial Fear Is Key to Trump’s Support Among Evangelicals. (It's not economic anxiety.) The media has been getting it all wrong, obsessing over white evangelicals’ unmovable support for Donald Trump. But Wong's new book, Immigrants, Evangelicals and Politics in an Era of Demographic Change, shows white evangelicals are more conservative than other whites on policy issues including welfare, climate change and immigration. Their conservative reaction to demographic change is at the heart of their political agenda and perhaps a response to increasing racial diversity within their own religious community.

[A]ccording to Election Day exit polls, 80 percent of white evangelicals supported Donald Trump. Among all other-- nonevangelical-- whites, 59 percent voted for Hillary Clinton.

That is true in part because white evangelicals are more conservative on a range of issues. According to our survey, for example, 27 percent of white evangelicals don’t believe the federal government should pass laws to combat climate change-- while 20 percent of other whites hold that position. More than 25 percent of white evangelicals oppose more federal spending on the poor, while that is true for about 14 percent of all nonevangelical whites. And about 50 percent of all white evangelicals believe immigration is bad for the economy, compared with about 33 percent of other, nonevangelical whites.

Even among evangelicals, there are wide racial divides on political positions. It is true evangelicals of all racial backgrounds hold more conservative views on issues such as abortion and same-sex marriage than does the general U.S. population.

Aside from these issues, evangelicals are very politically different by race. White evangelicals are markedly more conservative than Latino, Asian American and, perhaps not surprisingly, black evangelicals on climate change, federal funding to aid the poor and taxing the wealthy.

White evangelicals are more than twice as likely as any other group of evangelicals to oppose government funding to combat climate change or policies to tax the wealthy. No more than 10 percent of black, Asian American or Latino evangelicals oppose government regulation to combat climate change. Less than 15 percent of any of these groups oppose a tax increase on the wealthy, compared with about 30 percent of white evangelicals. White evangelicals are also more conservative on racial issues, whether those are attitudes about Black Lives Matter or the U.S. apologizing for slavery.

White evangelicals are much more conservative on immigration than nonwhite evangelicals. Fully 50 percent of white evangelicals in our survey agree that “immigrants hurt the economy,” compared with 22 percent of black evangelicals, 25 percent of Latino evangelicals  and 21 percent of Asian American evangelicals.

...Rank-and-file white evangelicals have the most negative attitudes toward immigrants of all U.S. religious groups. That’s true despite the fact that conservative white evangelical leaders strongly favor a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants.

My research indicates white evangelical conservatism correlates strongly with their perceptions anti-white discrimination, even after taking into account economic status, party, age and region. Fully 50 percent of white evangelical respondents to our 2016 survey reported feeling they face discrimination that’s comparable to, or even higher than, the discrimination they believe Muslim Americans face. Those who hold this perception are more likely to hold conservative attitudes on issues as wide-ranging as climate change, tax policy and health-care reform.

Here’s what is not behind these beliefs: economic anxiety. Like PRRI and political scientist Diana Mutz, I find economic anxiety isn’t a primary reason for supporting Trump. Rather, white evangelicals fear losing racial status. White evangelicals’ perceptions they’re the targets of discrimination-- more so than other groups-- influence far more than simply their votes for Trump.

Yes, 80 percent of white evangelicals supported Donald Trump in 2016. And the racial fears and anxieties that underlie their support for the president will probably remain the driver in their political views long after he leaves office.

Stephen Miller's great grandfather flunked his citizenship test in November of 1932 for "ignorance." The apple hasn't fallen far from the street, as Stephen Miller, a neo-Nazi, has proclaimed himself the architect of Trump's policy of kidnapping and abusing immigrant children, an all out anti-Christian agenda. Frank Schaeffer's father, Francis Schaeffer, was one of the founders of the "religious right" and Frank, a friend of mine, grew up in that environment. He left it long ago. After reading Wong's Washington Post article yesterday, he wrote this for us:

The public image of the leaders of the religious right I met with so many times in the 1970s and '80s contrasted with who they really were. In public they maintained an image that was usually quite smooth. In private they ranged from unreconstructed bigot reactionaries like Jerry Falwell, to Dr. Dobson, the most power-hungry and ambitious person I have ever met, to Billy Graham, a very weird man indeed who lived an oddly sheltered life in a celebrity/ministry cocoon, to actual madmen like Pat Robertson who, in any other line of work (where hearing voices is not part of the job description), would have been institutionalized.

They were all white. And with the exception of Graham had never been on the side of the civil rights movement. Falwell was an outspoken segregationist who only dropped public bigotry against blacks because he feared for his college’s accreditation.

Falwell disliked blacks and in private I was told used the N-word. He knew my father was against racial bigotry so never spoke that way to us. But when it came to gay rights and gays Jerry got personal. Dad and I were sitting in Falwell’s study just after Dad spoke at Jerry’s church. (Later I preached there too, endorsed Falwell, and also gave a talk to the whole student body.) Out of the blue Jerry brought up the gay issue. Dad said something about it being complicated and Jerry replied: “If I had a dog that did what they do I’d shoot him!”

The off-hand remark came from nowhere. Jerry wasn’t smiling. He was serious and just tossed his hatred out there the way gang members throw down hand signals.  Dad looked nonplussed but didn’t say anything, though later he growled, “That man is really disgusting.” Later still Dad commented, “You can be co-belligerents but don’t have to be allies.”

Make no mistake: white evangelicalism equals bigotry, racial hatred is par for the course. Look, if closing the border and separating migrant families wasn’t about race then evangelicals wouldn’t support Trump. Proof? The brown people coming north are Pentecostal Christians and conservative Roman Catholics. If they were Muslims or Hindus it could be argued that arresting them and deporting hem was about protecting our “Christian nation.”  But these ARE conservative Christians who share the white evangelical’s theology passionately! The only thing they don’t share with Trump’s evangelical supporters is a white skin.

A new Gallup poll finds that a record-high 75% of Americans, including majorities of all party groups, think immigration is a good thing for the U.S.-- up slightly from 71% last year. Just 19% of the public considers immigration a bad thing. A record-low number of Americans-- 29%-- saying that immigration into the U.S. should be decreased. Among Republicans and Republican leaners, 35% think immigration should be kept at its current level, 20% would like it increased and 42% say decreased.

Our friend, Harper Thorpe has written an alternative-- let's say updated-- version of Pete Seeger's "Where Have All The Flowers Gone?" The new song is "Where Have All The Children Gone?"



Where have all the children gone, all I’m asking?
Where have frightened toddlers gone, where did they go?
Where have our brown babies gone?
Picture cages everyone.
Oh, when will they be returned?
Oh, why aren’t you all concerned?

What can’t all the pictures shield, cruel harrassing?
What have all the tales revealed, what do we know?
What’s the story still concealed?
There’s no plan to bring them home.
Ivanka acts concerned,
What if my brand is spurned?

How come there’s no return plan, Kirstjen Nielsen?
How can you defend this man, his heartless show?
Think your mother’s still your fan?
Mother’s gone, but she looks on.
Think when she held you tight
And thanked the lord you’re white

Where have all the mothers gone, those trespassing?
Where have all the husbands gone, the human flow?
Where have all their children gone?
Trump pawns each and everyone
Are Mitch and Paul concerned?
Don’t want their guys mid-termed.

Where have Trump enablers gone, aura basking?
Senate, House, Republican, where did they go?
Cabinet and spokesmen gone?
Failed, jailed everyone.
Time they get what they’ve earned.
Enough of humans churned.

Pete Seeger (1919-2014)

"I have sung for pacifists and I have sung for soldiers."

-- Pete Seeger

Trailer for the 2007 documentary Pete Seeger: The Power of Song

"I decline to discuss, under compulsion, where I have sung, and who has sung my songs, and who else has sung with me, and the people I have known. I love my country very dearly, and I greatly resent this implication that some of the places that I have sung and some of the people that I have known, and some of my opinions, whether they are religious or philosophical, or I might be a vegetarian, make me any less of an American. I will tell you about my songs, but I am not interested in telling you who wrote them, and I will tell you about my songs, and I am not interested in who listened to them. . . ."

[Many questions later, in response to: "There are various peace groups in the country which have utilized your services, are there not?"]
"I have sung for pacifists and I have sung for soldiers."

-- Pete Seeger, testifying before a subcommittee of the House
Committee on Un-American Activities in NYC, Aug. 18, 1955

by Ken

Is it possible to cram more into a life than Pete Seeger did in his 94 years? Or to brighten more lives than he did, insisting -- so harmoniously -- on an image of a world that respects and nurtures humanity and decency? It's a life and legacy so enormous that, just as I know I can't begin to take its measure here, I know it's all just as much a part of us as it was while he was among us.

Whether he was singing his own songs, like"If I Had a Hammer" (with Lee Hays), "Where Have All the Flowers Gone?" (with Joe Hickerson), "Turn! Turn! Turn!," or other people's, like "We Shall Overcome" or so many others, with the legendary folk group the Weavers or on his own, or his songs were being sung by singers all over the world his music-making is part of the tapestry of half a century or more of American life, and American activism, since he remained steadfast in his vision of a more just and humane country and world.

The interrogator in the above-excerpted House subcommittee inquisition was a worm named Frank S. Tavenner Jr., HUAC's chief counsel, doing his darnedest to slime Pete as an anti-American tool of godless communism. It's one of those things that make you hope there's a Hell, because if so, that's where this miserable excuse for a human being is rotting for eternity rather than merely in the ground. (Tavenner died in 1964, and is buried in -- of all places -- Woodstock.) Howie passed along the link for the transcript of Pete's committee testimony, and I was deeply moved by his unfailing courteousness along with his steadfast refusal to be drawn into the squalid game of "naming names" to save his own hide.

And amid his testimony, when Tavenner tried to embarrass Pete with his association with (gasp!) pacifists, my eye lit on that line: "I have sung for pacifists and I have sung for soldiers." Isn't it amazing how much he packed into that simple sentence?

You have to remember that in the HUAC mentality, and the J. Edgar Hoover mentality, being against war was a crime against Americanism. I'm not sure it's all that different in the age of Rush Limbaugh and Fox Noise. And in the McCarthyite Red Scare of the '50s, views like these bumped up constantly against the vigilance of American mainstream fascism. At that 1955 hearing Pete stuck to his refusal to name names, and was subsequently indicted for contempt of Congress, which stands now as a mark of distinction. (Years later he was finally tried and convicted and sentenced to 10 years in prison, but the indictment was thrown out on appeal.)

You can read about Pete, well, pretty much everywhere today. An obvious place to start is Jon Pareles' New York Times obit, but all over the Web you'll find remembrances. A group close to my heart, the Working Harbor Committee, which covers the New York-New Jersey harbor, remembered Pete this morning with a post called "Fair Winds and Following Seas," honoring "the legendary singer and activist who founded the Hudson River Clearwater Organization and spent his life championing environmental awareness of pollution in the Hudson River" (links onsite), with this clip:



And of course you can find lots of other clips on YouTube.

Like I said, Pete's spirit and presence are all around us, and aren't likely to be going anywhere anytime soon. Thanks, Pete.


"At age 94, I don't have much voice left," Pete says after being introduced by John Mellencamp to sing "If I Had a Hammer" at the Farm Aid concert in Saratoga Springs, NY, on Sept. 21, 2013.

#

Right-Wing Immigration Policy: Quick Pull Up The Ladder!

Yesterday's Guardian reported that Alabama Republicans, in control of the state legislature and governorship for the first time in 136 years, passed the toughest illegal immigration law in the U.S., tougher than the law everyone was so appalled by that Arizona passed. Republicans in right-wing bastions like Utah, Indiana and Georgia have passed similar laws. (Georgia's agricultural sector, heavily dependent on migrant farm workers, is already in turmoil.)

The crackdown will require public schools to determine the immigration status of students – an aspect not covered in an Arizona law that has been at the forefront of attempts by several US states to crack down on illegal immigrants.

Under the Alabama law, police must detain someone they suspect of being in the country illegally if the person cannot produce proper documentation when stopped for any reason.

It also will be a crime to knowingly transport or harbour someone who is in the country illegally. The law imposes penalties on businesses that knowingly employ someone without legal resident status, and business licences could be suspended or revoked.

Backward, reactionary parts of the country, like Alabama, Georgia, Indiana, Utah and Arizona have always feared change and always been virulently anti-immigrant-- no matter what group the immigrant was from. The Know Nothing mentality has been, historically, anti-Irish, anti-German, anti-Catholic, anti-Slav, anti-Italian, anti-Asian, anti-Jewish. In 1924 Republicans passed a bigoted immigration law, gleefully signed by racist Calvin Coolidge, targeting "inferior groups." A quota for Italians, for example, was reduced from 42,000 a year to 4,000. One has to wonder how prominent Italian-American Republican immigrant haters like Tom Tancredo (CO), Lou Barletta (PA), Rick Santorum (PA), Steve Palazzo (MS), John Barrasso (WY), and John Mica (FL) deal with the collective memory.

As we've been seeing in The Nazi Hydra in America, the Republican Party, conniving with Hitler's government in Germany, played up this fear and hatred of foreigners-- especially Jews-- in the 1930s to sow discord in America.

To understand how the Republican Party could run election campaigns based on intense and vicious racist platforms; one needs to understand the attitude of the country towards Jews at the time. A few days after Kristallnacht, Roosevelt spoke out publicly expressing his anger and horror. A Gallup poll that month revealed that 94% of the people disapproved of the Nazi treatment of Jews, but 97% of the people also disapproved of the way Nazis treated Catholics. A Roper poll that same month revealed the deep anti-Semitic views in America. The poll found that only 39% of the people believed that Jews should be treated as everyone else, 53% believed that Jews were different and should be restricted, and 10% believed Jews should be deported. In the winter of 1938-1939, many had denounced helping "refu-Jews." Polls revealed 71-85% opposed increasing immigration quotes; 67% opposed admitting any refugees and 67% opposed a one-time admission of 10,000 refugee children.

Turning away the refugees aboard the St. Louis was a low point in the Roosevelt administration and perhaps indefensible in light of the Holocaust, but Roosevelt hardly acted in a vacuum. The public opinion was decidedly against admitting Jews. One can only guess at how much of the anti-Semitism prevalent at the time, was the direct result of the various anti-Semitic campaigns conducted by the Republican Party. It could not be a minor factor, as many of these anti-Semitic campaigns ran by Republicans equated Judaism with communism, as in the example of the 1938 Minnesota election.

Today Know Nothing Republicans like Sarah Palin can wear a Star of David while visiting New York City or a deranged bigot like Michele Bachmann can campaign against Barack Obama based on supposed love and devotion to a right-wing vision of a militaristic Jewish state. It may take some time, but in just a few generations, right-wing Republican hatred for Latinos will go from a high boil to a low simmer. Yesterday Congresswoman Yvette Clarke of Brooklyn released the following statement: "I am deeply saddened and disappointed that the Governor of Alabama has decided to enact such egregious anti-immigrant provisions in order to address our broken immigration system. Using our nation’s education system as a conduit to enforce immigration laws is highly inappropriate. It is my concern, that this will spread fear among students, hindering them from pursuing an education. Ever since the state of Arizona has enacted its harsh immigration laws, many states have followed suit, enacting provisions that often time over step their jurisdiction. This is a clear indication that our nation needs to address Comprehensive Immigration Reform at the federal level. Our national security is at stake; our moral standing in the world depends on it; and the American people, many of whom are first and second generation immigrants, demand it.” I'm sure you can guess why I want you to listen to Pete Seeger... keep listening:

Mary Travers (1936-2009)

Peter, Paul and Mary sing Lee Hays and Pete Seeger's
progressive anthem "If I Had a Hammer."

"Well, I've got a hammer,
And I've got a bell,
And I've got a song to sing,
All over this land.
It's the hammer of justice,
It's the bell of freedom,
It's the song about love between my brothers and my sisters,
All over this land."

"I was raised to believe that everybody has a responsibility to their community, and I use the word very loosely. It’s a big community. If I get recognized in the middle of the Sinai Desert, I have a big community.”

-- Mary Travers, to the New York Times in 1999
(quoted in William Grimes's NYT obituary)

Paul Stookey, Mary Travers, and Peter Yarrow

A "PUFF" REMINDER

We kicked off the new year with Peter, Paul and Mary singing Peter and Lenny Lipton's "Puff, the Magic Dragon."

Also, thanks to my friend Paul for passing along this amazing photo of PPM. -- Ken


UPDATE: Stirring NY Times Obituary

I grew up listening to Peter, Paul and Mary, and their music was part of the aural fabric of social change that swept America in the 1960s. Mary died yesterday (leukemia) in Connecticut, and today's Times puts her in context, especially for younger people who might not be familiar with her music. -- Howie

Ms. Travers brought a powerful voice and an unfeigned urgency to music that resonated with mainstream listeners. With her straight blond hair and willowy figure and two bearded guitar players by her side, she looked exactly like what she was, a Greenwich Villager directly from the clubs and the coffeehouses that nourished the folk-music revival.

“She was obviously the sex appeal of that group, and that group was the sex appeal of the movement,” said Elijah Wald, a folk-blues musician and a historian of popular music.

Ms. Travers’s voice blended seamlessly with those of her colleagues, Peter Yarrow and Paul Stookey, to create a rich three-part harmony that propelled the group to the top of the pop charts. Their first album, “Peter, Paul and Mary,” which featured the hit singles “Lemon Tree” and “If I Had a Hammer,” reached No. 1 shortly after its release in March 1962 and stayed there for seven weeks, eventually selling more than two million copies.

...Their sound may have been commercial and safe, but early on their politics were somewhat risky for a group courting a mass audience. Like Mr. Yarrow and Mr. Stookey, Ms. Travers was outspoken in her support for the civil-rights and antiwar movements, in sharp contrast to clean-cut folk groups like the Kingston Trio, which avoided making political statements.

Peter, Paul and Mary went on to perform at the 1963 March on Washington and joined the voting-rights marches from Selma to Montgomery, Ala., in 1965.

Over the years they performed frequently at political rallies and demonstrations in the United States and abroad. After the group disbanded, in 1970, Ms. Travers continued to perform at political events around the world as she pursued a solo career.

“They made folk music not just palatable but accessible to a mass audience,” David Hajdu, the author of “Positively Fourth Street,” a book about Mr. Dylan, Joan Baez and their circle, said in an interview. Ms. Travers, he added, was crucial to the group’s image, which had a lot to do with its appeal. “She had a kind of sexual confidence combined with intelligence, edginess and social consciousness-- a potent combination,” he said. “If you look at clips of their performances, the camera fixates on her. The act was all about Mary.”

Mr. Yarrow, in a statement on Wednesday, described Ms. Travers’s singing style as an expression of her character: “honest and completely authentic.”

Mr. Stookey, in an accompanying statement, wrote that “her charisma was a barely contained nervous energy-- occasionally (and then only privately) revealed as stage fright.”

#