Will Barr Be The First Attorney General To Be Impeached? Or Is Pelosi Too Tired?

Pre-Trump, historians have considered the two worst Attorneys General to be Wilson's A. Mitchell Palmer and his successor, Harry Daugherty, who was appointed by Warren G. Harding and also served, briefly, under Calvin Coolidge. Daugherty, a career criminal, was complicit in the Teapot Dome Scandal and was indicted and tried twice, although shenanigans in the Justice department led to hung juries and dismissals. The House Judiciary Committee also took up impeachment charges against him (1922) but partisan politics intervened and he was never impeached. That was the closest any Attorney General has come to impeachment.

If Memphis, Tennessee Congressman Steve Cohen has his way, William Barr, will be the first to actually be impeached. Pelosi and his clique oppose impeachment-- not because they believe he doesn't deserve to be removed from office, but because they feel it's too big a hassle before the election. Former Austin City Attorney Mike Siegel, a candidate for Congress (TX-10) feels strongly that Cohen is doing the right thing by moving forward. "The Attorney General has proven himself to be a threat to democracy and the rule of law," Siegel told me yesterday, "and I thank Congressman Cohen for pushing forward and making a record of Barr’s unlawful and incredibly damaging actions. The corruption of the Trump Administration is pervasive and never-ending, but it remains important that we draw clear lines about what is acceptable in a democratic nation."

On Friday, Cohen said "Even if the ultimate trier of the Senate is impotent to see the truth and to exercise discretion in keeping with the American public and the rule of law, we should pursue impeachment of Bill Barr because he is reigning terror on the rule of law." He wrote to his colleagues that he intends "to introduce a resolution laying out many instances of Attorney General Barr’s misconduct and urging the Judiciary Committee to continue its investigations into these instances, evaluate the evidence, and to determine if this constitutes impeachable conduct." Most Democrats are afraid to get on Pelosi's bad side and aren't joining Cohen's request for an inquiry, although Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) and Joe Neguse (D-CO) have both called on Barr to resign. New Jersey Congressman Bill Pascrell tweeted out his support for Cohen last week.

Pelosi said the solution to the "mess" that Barr is, would be the election. "He is contemptible; there’s no question about that. But at this point, let’s solve our problems by going to the polls and voting on Election Day, 131 days from now." Members of Congress make $174,000 a year. The majority and minority leaders of both the House and Senate make over $193,000 a year. And the Speaker-- Pelosi-- makes $223,500. Is that what she gets all that extra money for-- shoving her responsibilities off to the voters in 131 days. Barr can-- and, no doubt will-- cause irreparable damages in the next 131 days.

Yesterday, law professor Jennifer Taub penned an OpEd for Newsweek, William Barr Is Not America's Attorney General. Barr, she wrote, was activated by Trump "to do his personal and political bidding." John Elias, who works in the anti-trust division at DOJ, "testified that Barr is bending justice to serve Trump. As one example, Elias said that in August 2019, the antitrust division's leadership unjustifiably directed staff to investigate the world's four largest automakers to appease Trump. A month earlier, California announced that Ford, Volkswagen of America, Honda and BMW had each agreed to follow the state's emissions standards, which were far more stringent than what would be required under Trump's planned rollback. The deal humiliated Trump, and he lashed out on Twitter. The day after those tweets, the investigation began, said Elias, who explained that this was inappropriate in any case, as there are long-standing legal doctrines that make both state action of this type and joint efforts by private businesses to influence policy lawful."

She wrote that former Deputy Attorney General Donald Ayer "was the moral conscience of the hearing and gave perhaps the most overt condemnation of Barr. 'I believe that Attorney General Barr is a major threat to our legal system and to public trust in it,' he said. Barr has worked 'to free the president from accountability under a broad range of checks and balances that have played a critical role in our system for many decades,' Ayer testified. 'He has also grossly misused his powers as attorney general to advance the president's personal and political interests, and to protect his friends.'"

The bottom line is this: Barr is yet another public resource that the president is using for his private benefit. A tool. Even the witness invited by the Republican leadership, former Attorney General Michael Mukasey, did not deny the pressure Trump exerts on the attorney general. With Barr, Trump has the entire criminal justice apparatus in his hands to target his enemies and reward his family and friends.

But here's the good news. Congress created the position of the attorney general in 1789 with the Judiciary Act. Over the centuries, statutes have further fleshed out the attorney general's powers and duties. Congress still has the authority to shape this role, fund the Justice Department and, of course, impeach. It is long past time to use these powers. Our nation's top law enforcement officer must serve the public interest of justice, not the whims of a corrupt, authoritarian president.

But Pelosi wants to leave him to keep behaving this way for 131 days because... it's inconvenient? "Frankly," said Ayer, "my worry is he’s going to do it more and more in the weeks and months ahead as we get closer to the election." Ironically, House Republicans agree with Pelosi that there should be no impeachment hearings. Gym Jordan (R-OH): "Bill Barr is trying to do the Lord’s work to clean it up, so it doesn’t happen again."

Jordan set the tone. Barr, with his “exemplary record,” was “restoring integrity” within the department, said Rep. Steve Chabot (R-OH). The hearing was a “farce,” said Rep. Mike Johnson (R-LA), with Democrats knifing Barr for “trying to clean up and clear up messes made by the previous administration.” Most ominously, Rep. Louis Gohmert (R-TX) told the three witnesses that “history will not judge you kindly in the days ahead… whether we get to continue this experiment in self-government or not.” A spokesperson did not respond to a question about whether Gohmert believes the American republic is in danger of collapse.

It was the most foursquare defense of Barr from Hill Republicans yet. Their support for Trump, post-Russiagate and post-impeachment, is compulsory at this point. But on Wednesday, they went beyond allegiance to Trump to affirmatively portray Barr as the one out to drain the swamp.

  They did so days after perhaps the lowest point in Barr’s brief tenure. On Friday, Barr lied that the U.S. attorney in New York had resigned, prompting a weekend standoff over ousting Geoffrey Berman before Barr partially backed down. It remains unclear if Barr will himself testify before the House committee, but he knows he has a GOP firewall if he does.

Against all that, Democrats had rhetoric. Their leadership doesn’t want to impeach Barr. Their caucus is internally divided on what to do about him. Their response, which frequently overshadowed their focus on the substance of Elias and Zelinsky’s testimony, was to hurl invective at Barr. Chairman Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) called him Trump’s “fixer.” Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) called the politicization of the Justice Department “worse than Watergate, worse than Nixon.” Referring to Barr’s violent suppression of the June 1 protest in Lafayette Square, Rep. Cedric Richmond (D-LA) said that to the attorney general, friends of the president get pardons and reduced jail time, but “if you’re peacefully protesting brutality, you get tear-gassed.”

Jerry Nadler, who at first toed the Pelosi line about not impeaching Barr, now says he's considering it, telling reporters who asked if there will be impeachment hearings that "We're looking into that; we may very well. I think the weight of the evidence and of what's happened leads to that conclusion. More than one solid progressive, each of whom would love to see Barr impeached, told me they thought that Cohen should wait to drop the resolution until after Barr testifies... or if he refuses to testify. That takes away the argument of Republicans that the Democrats were already biased against him.

Congress Passes A First Step Towards Marijuana Legalization

The House was busy last night. At just past 1AM they passed, H.R. 4660, a huge appropriations bill for the Departments of Commerce and Justice, Science, and related agencies. The final vote was 321-87. Sounds routine and humdrum? There were 25 amendments, 14 of which got through. The one everyone is talking about today is a bipartisan amendment from two Californians, Dana Rohrabacher ® and Sam Farr (D), which restricts the Drug Enforcement Administration from targeting medical marijuana operations in states where it is legal. The House has never passed any pro-pot bill before. THis one passed 219-189. 170 Democrats were joined by 49 of the more libertarian-leaning Republicans to pass it. 172 Republicans voted no, as did 17 mostly conservative Democrats. These were the 17 Democrats who crossed the aisle because they want raids to continue. Remember, when you contribute to the DCCC, many of these rightists are the ones who get the money:

• John Barrow (Blue Dog-GA)
• Karen Bass (D-CA)
• Jim Cooper (Blue Dog-TN)
• Henry Cuellar (Blue Dog-TX)
• Pete Gallego (Blue Dog-TX)
• Rubén Hinojosa (D-TX)
• Bill Keating (D-MA)
• Joe Kennedy (D-MA)
• Sandy Levin (D-MI)
• Dan Lipinski (Blue Dog-IL)
• Jim Matheson (Blue Dog-UT)
• Mike McIntyre (Blue Dog-NC)
• Collin Peterson (Blue Dog-MN)
• Nick Rahall (Blue Dog-WV)
• Terri Sewell (New Dem-AL)
• Debbie Wasserman Schultz (New Dem-FL)
• Frederica Wilson (D-DL)

Signing on as co-sponsors were an array of extreme right Republicans-- Donald Young, Tom McClintock, Paul Broun, Steve Stockman and Justin Amash-- and center-left Democrats, Earl Blumenauer, Steve Cohen, Jared Polis, Barbara Lee, and Dina Titus. During the debate, Cohen, a feisty progressive from Memphis, said, "We saw Reefer Madness in the thirties, and it has come back to Congress here 80-some-odd years later… Marijuana does not make people commit crime. It makes them overeat."

Another amendment that passed with big bipartisan support was Mike Thompson's background checks amendment, which won 260-145. 76 Republicans joined all but 3 Democratic Party NRA whores to vote for the modest amendment. The 3 Democratic NRA whores:

• John Barrow (Blue Dog-GA)
• Collin Peterson (Blue Dog-MN)
• Nick Rahall (Blue Dog-WV)

142 Republicans voted for more mayhem and murder but Thompson's Republican co-sponsors were Pete King (R-NY), Joe Heck (R-NV) and Mike Fitzpatrick (R-PA). The cosponsors, in a joint statement, said "Our national criminal background check system is only as good as the data you put in it, and right now all the information isn’t getting into the system. When this happens, we can’t enforce the law, and criminals, domestic abusers, or dangerously mentally ill individuals who otherwise wouldn't pass a background check can slip through the cracks and buy guns. Our bipartisan amendment addresses this dangerous shortfall of information by providing states with the resources they need to get their records into the criminal background checks system." The amendment provides an additional $19.5 million to help states improve their submissions into the criminal background checks system' a tiny baby step… but at least it's moving in the right direction.

The other amendment worth noting-- which passed 225-183-- was a profound piece if legislation by Orlando Congressman Alan Grayson which prohibits "the use of funds to compel a journalist or a reporter to testify about information or sources that the journalist or reporter states in a motion to quash the subpoena that he has obtained as a journalist or reporter and that he regards as confidential." That's right-- a codification to protect journalists sources. 53 Republicans joined 172 Democrats to pass this landmark amendment. Only 15 mostly conservative Democrats, led by Steny Hoyer, voted no, mostly the same old jerks from the Republican wing of the Democratic Party who vote with the Republicans on just about everything: Barrow, Lipinski, McIntyre, Rahall...

The Democratic leadership rated the amendment a "no recommendation" and the Republican leadership recommended a NO vote. This was Grayson's Dear Colleague letter than swung the balance and passed the amendment:

Dear Colleague:

In the last set of votes on the CJS Appropriations Bill, there will be a vote on having the Federal Government join 49 states in protecting reporter sources.  The amendment reads as follows:

“None of the funds made available by this Act may be used to compel a journalist or reporter to testify about information or sources that the journalist or reporter states in a motion to quash the subpoena that he has obtained as a journalist or reporter and that he regards as confidential.”

This amendment would bring federal law in conformity with the law of the States; of the 50 States, only Wyoming lacks protection for reporter information and sources.  This gap between federal law and State law has persisted for over 40 years, since the closely contested 5-to-4 U.S. Supreme Court decision of Branzburg v. Hayes.  Ironically, even though the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution guarantees “freedom . . . of the press,” absent statutory authority, federal courts have been reluctant to follow the consensus established by the States that protects reporters and their sources.  For over four decades, Congress has failed to fill this gap.

Support for such a law is bipartisan and bicameral.  In the House, last July, Reps. John Conyers and Ted Poe joined together in a op-ed article entitled “A Shield Law Is Essential to a Robust Press.”  In the Senate, Senators Charles Schumer and Lindsey Graham have introduced a federal shield law that has drawn the approval of the White House, called the “Free Flow of Information Act.”

The need for a shield law is hardly abstract.  In 2005, New York Times reporter Judith Miller was jailed for 85 days for doing exactly what any reporter would do, i.e., refusing to reveal her source.

I encourage my colleagues to seize this opportunity, pass this amendment, and show our continuing respect for the U.S. Constitution, the First Amendment, and freedom itself.

And encouraged they were. The Establishment lost. America won.

EMILY's List Up To No Good Again-- In L.A... And In Hawaii?

Sen. Brian Schatz, City Councilman Eric Garcetti-- too progressive for EMILY's List

On election day eve, late summer 2008, long after mail-in ballots had been sent in, EMILY's List sent out a bizarre message to its members in Tennessee. They withdrew their endorsement from the corrupt, conservative Democratic woman they had recruited and backed all year, Nikki Tinker, a cog in the Harold Ford political machine who was taking on progressive incumbent Steve Cohen, a 100% pro-choice ally. Tinker, was the quintessential candidate of the new EMILY's List: conservative, Blue Dog, corrupt to the bone, allied to Big Business... but she stepped over the line as her campaign turned more and more virulently anti-Semitic and upset EMILY's List's Jewish donor base in the Northeast and on the West Coast. Cohen, meanwhile had been endorsed by progressive women's groups like the National Organization for Women (NOW) and by Planned Parenthood and was way ahead in the polls.

EMILY's List's unendorsement of their candidate had no impact. But Tinker's vile ads did. Cohen won with 79.34% against Tinker's 18.64%. Before Tinker let loose with her barrage of vicious, racist, Republican-like negative ads Cohen was only leading with 65%. Negative ads work with Republican voters, not so much with Democratic voters. "It says Memphis has come a long, long way and that people who were counting on racial voting to prevail are thinking of a Memphis that doesn't exist anymore," Cohen said. "The people of Memphis are more sophisticated voters that deal with issues and someone's record and not simply race."

In the race for L.A. mayor, EMILY's List, predictably, picked the more conservative and sleazy candidate, ex-Republican Wendy Greuel, while progressive women's groups like NOW are backing proven ally and pro-Choice stalwart Eric Garcetti. No one expects anything more from EMILY's List. They back conservative, pro-choice women. But what people do expect is that they refrain from the gutter politics that have gotten them in trouble in the past. Yesterday many of us found this shady mailer from EMILY's List attacking Garcetti by objectifying women:

As Wendy Greuel and her allies unleash unwarranted attack after unwarranted attack on Garcetti, Los Angelenos have grown more and more angry, angry at Greuel and angry at EMILY's List. Garcetti, who was in a dead heat with Greuel after the first round primary has now pulled ahead by double digits. EMILY's List never learns that the Republican strategies it uses in Democratic primaries don't work among Democrats. They didn't work for Nikki Tinker and they're failing to work for Wendy Greuel. And they won't work for EMILY's List's latest conservative recruit, New Dem Colleen Hanabusa, who's running against progressive Senator Brian Schatz.

Hanabusa, an opportunist burning with ambition, was first elected to the House in 2010. She joined the conservative, Big Business-aligned New Dems and ran up a mediocre record as a backbencher with little to no influence. Rather than follow the trail being blazed by fellow congresswoman Mazie Hirono, a progressive champion, Hanabusa stuck to a path to nowhere started by much-disliked right-wing former Democratic Congressman Ed Case. Yesterday she announced she will give up her House seat to run for Brian Schatz's seat in the Senate.

Hanabusa had been considering primary challenges to either Schatz or Abercrombie. A source close to her campaign said Monday that Hanabusa had decided on a Senate campaign and was informing close allies.

A primary between Schatz, 40, and Hanabusa, 61, would evoke generational as well as political fault lines within the Democratic Party. Schatz, a progressive, has the potential to build seniority in the Senate over a generation. Hanabusa, a more traditional liberal, will contend that her experience prepares her to have an immediate impact.

By "traditional liberal," they mean corrupt conservative. The only mark Hanabusa has made in Congress, other than being a lap dog for K Street and a predictable New Dem, was pioneering a way around ethics rules to make money personally from her campaign. Hanabusa "collected significant amounts of money in interest from personal loans she made to her campaign. In addition, her campaign reimbursed her husband thousands of dollars in expenses."

“With the interest rates Rep. Hanabusa is charging for loaning her own campaign money, she could be confused for a loan shark,” said CREW Executive Director Melanie Sloan. “Most Americans open a savings account when they want to earn a little interest on their money. Instead, Rep. Hanabusa is making a killing by investing in her own campaign.”

Campaign records show Rep. Hanabusa made two loans to her campaign committee, totaling $125,000, in 2006. Since then, she has charged more than 9% interest on these loans, resulting in over $30,000 in interest payments. At the end of the 2010 election cycle, less than $3,000 of the principal on these loans had been repaid. Additionally, campaign records show that Rep. Hanabusa’s campaign committee reimbursed her husband, John Souza, almost $9,000 for food and other expenses during the 2010 cycle.

A few weeks ago, I called Honolulu City Councilman Stanley Chang when I saw he had filed the paperwork to run for Hanabusa's 1st district seat. I was excited that someone was going to offer her a primary challenge. He told me that it was an open secret in Hawaii that Hanabusa would not be running for reelection but would try to climb the political greasy pole, either by running against Governor Neil Abercrombie or against Senator Brian Schatz, both progressives. Since being appointed to Congress, Schatz has run up a 94.12 ProgressivePunch crucial vote score, the 11th best in the Senate, almost as good as Mazie Hirono's 96.30. Schatz and Hirono are both co-sponsors of Tom Harkin's bill to take Chained CPI off the table. Hanabusa is keeping her mouth shut on where she stands on Chained CPI. Schatz is exactly the kind of Democrat EMILY's List thrives on attacking and smearing. We'll be watching.

Gerrymandering Is Dangerous To The Health Of Our Democracy-- So Why Won't Congress Do Something About It?

Gerrymandering undermines democracy and, from a partisan perspective, it can cut both ways. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, one of the least savory and most corrupt Members of Congress, recently reelected to head the DNC-- and with a fast track to the future House Democratic Leader post in her back pocket-- once, as a member of the Florida state Senate, drew herself a congressional district she could run in the next year-- and has been in Congress ever since. Several of her shady Florida colleagues (both sides of the aisle) did the same thing.

Georgia Blue Dog John Barrow, no friend of this blog's by any stretch of the imagination, has had a very different experience with gerrymandering than the power-crazed Wasserman Schultz. One of the chief sponsors of H.R. 223-- the John Tanner Fairness and Independence in Redistricting Act (the anti-gerrymandering act)-- Barrow has been pursued, relentlessly, by Republicans in the Georgia state legislature, trying to redistrict him out of a seat. A longtime Athens-Clarke County commissioner, Barrow was first elected to Congress in 2004-- on the same day the GOP won control of both Houses of the Georgia state legislature for the first time since Reconstruction. One of their first acts was an unprecedented mid-decade gerrymander meant specifically to defeat Barrow. They removed his hometown, solidly blue Athens, from his district and he was forced to move to Savannah to have a chance of staying in Congress. He narrowly won reelection. Last year the legislature, in an attempt to defeat Barrow again, took overwhelmingly blue Savannah out of the district, making it much redder and forcing him, in effect, to move to Augusta. But he once again managed to scrape by and cling to his seat.

H.R. 223 prohibits mid-decade redistricting and puts redistricting into the hands of nonpartisan commissions and takes the job away from craven politicians. "All over the country, the votes of moderates and independents are being suppressed by the partisans who are in control of the redistricting process in their states," writes Barrow on his House website. "The result is that the partisan extremes are over-represented in Congress and the moderate majority is under-represented. This is a bipartisan problem, and it requires a nonpartisan solution."

There's a lot of talk about how Republican legislatures with Republican governors in Pennsylvania, Ohio, Virginia, Florida, Wisconsin, North Carolina and Michigan have redrawn their states' districts to the advantage of the GOP. That's completely true. They're as bad as Georgia and as bad as Texas was when Tom DeLay rejiggered the state legislature there. But there are states where the Democrats control legislatures and governors' mansions where they're as bad as the Republicans. Illinois and Maryland, for example, were as outrageous last year as Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.

So why doesn't Barrow's bill have any co-sponsors? I asked several Members of Congress if it's because he's held in such low esteem on both sides of the aisle. Several mentioned that Steve Cohen (D-TN) has an identical bill, H.R. 278 (also called the John Tanner Fairness and Independence in Redistricting Act) and that he has 6 cosponsors, not just progressives but also two of Barrow's fellow Blue Dogs, Collin Peterson (MN) and Mike Michaud (ME). Cohen, who represents Memphis, spoke for many reform-minded members of both parties: “It’s time to take politics out of the redistricting process. Congress is so polarized today that we’re unable to find common ground on the major issues facing our country.  Instead of solving our nation’s problems, Congress is just kicking the can down the road and waiting until the next election for answers.  I believe that if we eliminate the gerrymandering of districts we will help get more accomplished for our country.” This morning he told me that if the bill eventually passes, starting right after the 2020 census, it would require each state to appoint an independent, transparent congressional redistricting commission, the way California and Arizona do now. The commission would be charged with creating a redistricting plan that emphasizes geographical contiguity and compactness of districts rather than political affiliations or the impact a district’s lines may have on incumbent representatives.

The responses I got from a dozen or so other Members-- many who refused to talk about it on the record-- led me to understand that so many Members have benefited from gerrymandering that they don't see it as a big problem for democracy; they see it as a tool in their own careers, all too often the primary prism through which many Members look at any issue.

Right now, for example, the NAACP is pushing back against Virginia Republicans who have gerrymandered the state so that despite statewide majorities for Obama (1,971,820 to 1,822,522) and Senator Tim Kaine (1,944,992 to 1,758,857) in November, there are 8 Republican districts and only 3 Democratic districts. Virginia Republicans want to start awarding presidential electoral votes based on these unfairly drawn House districts. Hilary Shelton, senior vice president for advocacy at the NAACP, explained that “You want to make sure in any system put in place in any state that the outcome is reflective of the actual votes cast. What we have is a system that’s being proposed and actually moving forward in many ways that does not meet that criteria and that raises concerns for us.”

Under the bill proposed by State Sen. Charles Carrico (R), Mitt Romney would have won nine electoral votes to President Obama’s four in 2012 despite losing the popular vote of the state handily. This is because the congressional map is currently gerrymandered in the Republican Party’s favor, a situation that critics note would dilute the impact of African American voters packed into heavily Democratic urban districts while lending more weight to voters in whiter and less populated areas. A similar dynamic would likely occur in other blue states controlled by Republicans that are currently considering rejiggering their electoral votes. Had Carrico’s proposed changes been applied nationally before the 2012 election, Romney would have been elected president even though he received close to 5 million fewer votes than Obama.

“The way this is structured, racial and ethnic minority groups or any subgroups within the state would find themselves quite frankly more disenfranchised then ever,” Shelton said, adding that the bill would be “moving away from more democratic forms of governance.”

Although no one was willing to speak on the record about it, the Congressional Black Caucus opposes efforts like Barrow's to stop the partisan gerrymandering. "A lot of their members," one congressman told me, "have benefited from the crooked redrawing of lines. Republicans make deals with African-American politicians for super-safe seats with unassailable majorities in return for supporting GOP plans that strip competitive districts out of the system."

Earl Blumenauer (D-OR) is one of the original co-sponsors of Cohen's bill. He told me that “It’s the worst kept secret in Washington that our current redistricting process too often gives incumbent politicians more influence over picking their voters, than voters have in picking their politicians. Both political parties have developed the redistricting process into an art form, punishing opponents and protecting incumbents. Politicians should not be allowed to achieve through the redistricting process what they can’t accomplish at the ballot box. To make Congress more representative, all districts in all states should follow balanced criteria and metrics instead of the corrupt system we have today.” That's why he has the reputation for being one of Congress' most dedicated reformers.

Gerrymandering-- Another Anti-Democracy Tool In The Right-wing Arsenal

At this point you have to either be an unreconstructed Southerner or a Michele Bachmann constituent to not understand that the Republican congressional strategy is to undermine the United States and cause as many people as possible as much pain as they can. House Republicans aren't even hiding it any longer. That's because of gerrymandering. Their districts have been drawn so precisely to exclude anyone who hasn't been brainwashed by Fox, that no matter what normal people think about GOP treachery, the congressmen leading and enabling it can be reelected forever and ever. It doesn't matter that militia extremist Steve Stockman (R-TX) was involved in the Oklahoma City bombing, his constituents love him and 165,388 of them gave him a 71% win. Yesterday he was threatening to introduce legislation to impeach President Obama. How do trolls like Louie Gohmert (R-TX), Virginia Foxx (R-NC), Buck McKeon (R-CA), Patrick McHenry (R-NC), Steve King (R-IA), Trey Radel (R-FL), Steven Palazzo (R-MS), Marsha Blackburn (R-OH), Ken Calvert (R-CA), Lynn Westmoreland (R-GA), Darrell Issa (R-CA) get elected? Why did it take so much sturm und drang for voters to finally dump a claque of obvious sociopaths like David Rivera (R-FL), Frank Guinta (R-NH), Mean Jean Schmidt (R-OH), Allen West (R-FL), Dan Lungren (R-CA), Ann Marie Buerkle (R-NY), and Joe Walsh (R-IL)?



Oregon Republican Greg Walden, the new NRCC Chairman, understands exactly why. "Redistricting," he crowed, "was a blessing for us." A blessing because Republicans can act like dicks and psychopaths and not have to worry about being defeated at elections. Their handpicked (or computer-picked) constituents are as bad as they are-- sometimes even worse. Thursday Alexandra Jaffe suggested in The Hill that Republicans are worried that they'll lose the House in 2014 if they continue botching up the debt ceiling debate. I guess that comes down to a definition of "botching up."

There’s growing angst among Republicans that the party’s House majority could be at risk in 2014 if the deep GOP divisions that emerged during the recent “fiscal cliff” negotiations persist in looming negotiations over a slew of budgetary issues.

Even as Republican officials maintain the GOP majority is safe, several lawmakers and longtime activists warn of far-reaching political ramifications if voters perceive Republicans as botching consequential talks on the debt ceiling, sequestration and a possible government shutdown.

“Majorities are elected to do things, and if they become dysfunctional, the American people will change what the majority is,” Rep. Tom Cole (R-Okla.), a House deputy majority whip and a former National Republican Congressional Committee chairman, told The Hill.

Concerns on the right stem from a public perception that House Republicans were to blame-- because of poor leadership strategy and rank-and-file dissent-- for bringing the country to the edge of the fiscal cliff late last month. ... Only 19 percent of Americans approved of the job Republican leaders did on the issue, while 48 percent said they approved of Obama’s handling of the negotiations, according to a Pew Research Center poll.

And polling that shows generic national polling favoring congressional Democrats by double digits is unimportant. Individual, usually genrrymandered, Republican districts are the only thing these House Members care about. And Jaffe did acknowledge "redistricting shifted a majority of House districts into solid-red territory... Democrats need to net 17 districts to take back the House in 2014, widely considered a significant hurdle to overcome." Combine that with DCCC Chairman Steve Israel's astounding incompetence and his insistence that he will not target GOP leaders or any of his pals from the Center Aisle Caucus and you come up with a mathematical impossibility-- regardless of what the Republicans do to screw up the country-- that they can lose the House! Jamelle Bouie responded to Jaffe almost immediately in the Washington Post.

We’re just a few weeks into 2013, but the Republican brand has already reached a new low. To wit, when given the choice between a generic congressional Democrat, and a generic congressional Republican, only 37 percent say they would support the Republican, according to the latest survey from Rasmussen.

Indeed, it’s this unpopularity that has caused a little panic in GOP ranks. The Hill’s Alexandra Jaffe reports on the “growing angst” among Republican lawmakers over the longevity of their House majority. In short, they worry that the voters will punish the GOP if its perceived as “botching consequential talks on the debt ceiling, sequestration and a possible government shutdown” ... Not only are Republicans trailing on the generic congressional ballot, but the public has grown tired of GOP shenanigans. According to a CNN poll released last month, 53 percent of Americans saw Republican policies as extreme, and 52 percent believed that Republicans should give up more than Democrats to craft bipartisan solutions to the nation’s problems. Likewise, according to the most recent Washington Post poll, 71 percent of Americans disapprove of Republicans in Congress, and 67 percent say they’re doing too little to work with Obama on “important issues.”

Happy Days are here again? Not so fast. Without even going into the whole gerrymandered district problem, Bouie points out that "the midterm electorate is much different than the one that votes in presidential elections. The former is older, whiter, and more conservative. The latter is younger, browner, and more liberal. It’s that difference which drove the Republican gains of 2010, and which gave Obama a huge advantage in last year’s presidential election. Even if Republicans provoke a debt ceiling crisis and destroy any remaining credibility they enjoy, it remains true that they’ll enter 2014 with a favorable electorate on their side. And given the extent to which voters tend to support the same party, regardless of circumstances, odds are good that Republicans won’t lose any of their most reliable voters." And it can get a lot worse.

The GOP now wants to use the corrupt gerrymandering of congressional districts-- tolerated and enjoyed by Democrats who are far from innocent in this matter-- to assign electoral votes so that their candidates can consistently lose the popular vote by large margins while winning the gerrymandered congressional districts and then presidency. A new poll from Gallup released yesterday shows that only 29% of Americans support keeping the electoral college, which was conceived as an anti-democratic tool from inception and has become worse and worse of the years. Scott Keyes at Think Progress pointed out how it's worked so far.

[T]he Republican State Leadership Committee released a report boasting that the only reason the GOP controls the House of Representatives is because they gerrymandered congressional districts in blue states.

The RSLC’s admission came in a shockingly candid report entitled, “How a Strategy of Targeting State Legislative Races in 2010 Led to a Republican U.S. House Majority in 2013?. It details how the group spent $30 million in the 2010 election cycle to sweep up low-cost state legislature races in blue states like Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. Their efforts were so successful, in fact, that Republicans went from controlling both legislative chambers in 14 states before Election Day to 25 states afterward.

In turn, the new Republican majorities would be tasked with redrawing congressional districts for the 2012 election. “The rationale was straightforward,” the report reads. “Controlling the redistricting process in these states would have the greatest impact on determining how both state legislative and congressional district boundaries would be drawn.”

This effort paid off in spades. As the RSLC’s report concedes, a majority of Americans voted for Democratic congressional candidates on Election Day, but only through the miracle of gerrymandering did Republicans wind up controlling the House. From the report:

Farther down-ballot, aggregated numbers show voters pulled the lever for Republicans only 49 percent of the time in congressional races, suggesting that 2012 could have been a repeat of 2008, when voters gave control of the White House and both chambers of Congress to Democrats.

But, as we see today, that was not the case. Instead, Republicans enjoy a 33-seat margin in the U.S. House seated yesterday in the 113th Congress, having endured Democratic successes atop the ticket and over one million more votes cast for Democratic House candidates than Republicans. The only analogous election in recent political history in which this aberration has taken place was immediately after reapportionment in 1972, when Democrats held a 50 seat majority in the U.S. House of Representatives while losing the presidency and the popular congressional vote by 2.6 million votes.

The report credits gerrymandered maps in Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin with allowing Republicans to overcome a 1.1 million popular-vote deficit. In Ohio, for instance, Republicans won 12 out of 16 House races “despite voters casting only 52 percent of their vote for Republican congressional candidates.” The situation was even more egregious to the north. “Michiganders cast over 240,000 more votes for Democratic congressional candidates than Republicans, but still elected a 9-5 Republican delegation to Congress.”

Though party officials typically dance around the unseemly issue of gerrymandering, this report is surprisingly candid and unabashed. The RSLC, after all, is tasked with winning control of state legislatures in large part so they can redraw congressional maps to the GOP’s benefit after redistricting. Because most states allow partisan redistricting, its understandable that the RSLC would release a report boasting of its gerrymandering success that “paved the way to Republicans retaining a U.S. House majority in 2012.”

And that's why Memphis Tennessee Democrat Steve Cohen has introduced a bill that seeks to end the whole gerrymandering practice and replace cigar smoke filled backrooms-- and fancy partisan computer programs with independent redistricting commissions like the ones California and Arizona use.

Cohen said his bill would help prevent the partisan redistricting of states, which many Democrats and Republicans have said creates districts that favor one party or another and allows hyper-partisan candidates to get elected.

"It's time to take politics out of the redistricting process," Cohen said. "Congress is so polarized today that we're unable to find common ground on the major issues facing our country.

Cohen's co-sponsors are fellow progressives Earl Blumenauer (D-OR) and Dave Loebsack (D-IA), two Blue Dogs, Mike Michaud (ME) and Collin Peterson (MN) plus John Dingell (MI) and the head of the New Dems, Ron Kind (WI). The bill has been sent to the House Judiciary Committee to be killed by corrupt Republican Chairman Bob Goodlatte (VA), an anti-reform fanatic. Now watch Rachel Maddow explain what Operation RedMap was and how the GOP used it to steal the House majority in November:

Steve Cohen Draws Another Primary Opponent Based On Race

Ninety days after being re-elected mayor in October, 2007-- with 42% of the vote-- Memphis' controversial Willie Herenton announced he had other priorities in his life would be stepping down, looking towards regaining his old job as Memphis City School superintendent as a stepping stone to run for Memphis' congressional seat against progressive stalwart Steve Cohen. He's been resigning and postponing resigning all summer but finally made the move on July 30-- and then promptly pulled papers needed to run for mayor in the special election in October to replace him. Today's NY Times reports he has also started a racism-tinged campaign against popular two-term Rep. Steven Cohen.

It's hardly the first time Cohen has been attacked by a racist crank. Like Nikki Tinker, who eked out 19% of the vote against Cohen after a bitterly vicious, anti-Semitic campaign, Herenton, best known by many for his shady business dealings and startling corruption, says he isn't being adequately represented by a white person.

He is running a blistering campaign against Representative Steve Cohen, a fellow Democrat with a precarious hold on the majority black district.

“To know Steve Cohen is to know that he really does not think very much of African-Americans,” Mr. Herenton said in a recent radio interview on KWAM. “He’s played the black community well.”

The primary election in August 2010 pits an unlikely officeholder-- a Jew in a deeply Christian region, a middle-age white man known for fighting for blacks and women-- against a prominent challenger. Already, the campaign has proved how deeply race still infuses much of politics in the South, even after the election of a black president.

...“This seat was set aside for people who look like me,” said Mr. Herenton’s campaign manager, Sidney Chism, a black county commissioner. “It wasn’t set aside for a Jew or a Christian. It was set aside so that blacks could have representation.”

Mr. Cohen, 60, is a well-known Memphis liberal who considered joining the Congressional Black Caucus, wrote a national apology for slavery and the Jim Crow laws, and received an “A” rating from the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People.

“I vote like a 45-year-old black woman,” he said in an interview. “I don’t know the black experience, but I know about being a minority and being discriminated against because of religion.”

But his unusual identity-- as one of only two white members of Congress from majority black districts-- makes him vulnerable politically. In the last election, his opponent ran a much-vilified advertisement that tried to link Mr. Cohen to the Ku Klux Klan. It juxtaposed Mr. Cohen with an image of a hooded Klansman and criticized him for voting not to rename a state park currently named for a Klan founder, Nathan Bedford Forrest.

Politically, Cohen has attached himself to Barack Obama, inarguably the most popular political figure in Memphis. (McCain only managed to scrap together 22% of the vote in TN-09 last year, far worse than Bush did in 2000 or 2004-- and his worst performance in Tennessee, which he won with 57%.) Cohen is inherently far more progressive and far more oriented towards overt action towards helping struggling working families than Obama's centrist corporate-friendly administration is. On June 16 Cohen wasn't among the 32 Democrats voting against the war supplemental. It may have been where his heart was but he wasn't about to do anything to piss off Rahm Emanuel at a time when a wink and a nod from Obama could determine the primary victor. Similarly, Cohen-- a fanatic supporter of universal health care reform-- wasn't one of the Progressive Caucus members vowing to defy President Obama and vote against his reform legislation if it didn't include the kind of meaningful reform Emanuel's corporate allies are dead set against. It's a very peculiar position for a fighting liberal like Cohen to be in, but he is surely aware that pleasing Emanuel (and Obama) means a lot more right now than walking in lockstep with close congressional allies like John Conyers, Donna Edwards and Maxine Waters in a battle to secure a health care bill that would be ideal for constituents of TN-09, where 89,000 uninsured people-- of the 107,000 who currently have no health insurance-- would stand to gain high-quality, affordable insurance if a bill with the public option passes. Conyers, Edwards and Waters are part of the team demanding that Obama stick with that-- in the face of mounting pressure from corporate shills to abandon it. Cohen has little choice but to cheer lead the president's public stand that thus far seems to favor the same goals progressives like Conyers, Edwards and Waters are insisting on.

Last year John Barrow-- another white politician in a district where most Democrats are black, albeit, unlike the liberal Cohen, a very conservative anti-family rep-- had his political skin saved by Obama when Obama endorsed him against a progressive African-American state senator, Regina Thomas. Barrow has gone on to rack up one of the most jaw-dropping anti-Obama voting records of any Democrat in Congress; he is currently aggressively campaigning against meaningful health care reform. It should be informative to watch and see how Obama handles the primary challenge that Barrow faces-- Thomas, a stalwart fighter for health care reform and for the Obama agenda, is likely to run against him again-- in comparison to how he handles the primary battle between Cohen and Herenton.

Rahm Emanuel Gets It Wrong Again-- His Tone Deaf War Against Comedy Central And Stephen Colbert

Maybe Emanuel should be giving advice to the Lynn Westmorelands of the world

Rahm Emanuel's control of the Democratic congressional caucus' communications apparatus has guaranteed that he would get undue credit for the Democratic House victories in 2006. I'm sure it was his political genius that also was decisive in the John Tester, Jim Webb, Bernie Sanders, Amy Klobuchar, Bob Menendez, Ben Cardin, Sheldon Whitehouse, Bob Casey, Jr., Sherrod Brown, and Claire McCaskill races as well.

In fact, if memory serves me well, Democrats who followed Emanuel's reactionary, self serving and tin-eared advice to not attack Republicans on the Iraq War (which he adamantly supports) were mostly among the losers. In the Philly suburbs there were three hotly contested congressional races against three rubber stamp Republicans. Jim Gerlach, Curt Weldon and Mike Fitzpatrick. The 3 districts were all taken-- narrowly-- by John Kerry in 2004 and by Al Gore in 2000. In 2004 it was Gerlach who had come closest to being defeated-- 51-49%, and by the same candidate who was challenging him in 2006, Lois Murphy. In 2005 Weldon has been re-elected with 59% and Fitzpatrick with 55%. Gerlach looked like the most likely to lose. And then Emanuel stepped in and browbeat Lois Murphy into "toning down" her anti-war message. Fortunately, neither Joe Sestak nor Patrick Murphy, running against Weldon and Fitzpatrick paid Emanuel any heed, ran anti-war campaigns and won. Lois lost 51-49% again.

The same thing happened in northern San Diego County, where Duke Cunningham had been sentenced to prison for bribery and popular anti-war activist Francine Busby was set to win... until Emanuel stepped in and demand she tone down the Iraq rhetoric if she wanted DCCC support. She did-- and she lost 54-43%. I recall dozens of Democratic candidates telling me how Emanuel demanded they cut back on their anti-Iraq campaign or prepare to run without DCCC support. The only one who gave me permission to use his conversations on the record was Iowa challenger Bruce Braley, who told Emanuel he was just wrong and didn't understand Iowa and to butt out. Braley ran a powerful anti-war campaign and took 55% of the vote. Rahm takes the credit for that one too. (Of course Emanuel even takes the credit for campaigns he worked against, like Jerry McNerney's, John Yarmuth's, Carol Shea-Porter's, and John Hall's, who he said were all too progressive and too grassroots to win-- and then tried to make sure they didn't.) The four races Emanuel, as DCCC Chair, spent most heavily in were on behalf of Tammy Duckworth (IL), Ken Lucas (KY), Lois Murphy (PA) and Christine Jennings (FL); they all lost. Had Emanuel put even a fraction of that money into, say Larry Kissell's race-- which he didn't believe in-- Larry would have spent the last year and a half laboring on behalf of North Carolina working families. Instead Emanuel threw his weight-- and cash-- behind Heath Shuler who is one of 6 Emanuel freshmen who vote more frequently with the GOP on substantive matters than with the Democrats.

Anyway, it's a slow summer day on Capitol Hill for everyone (except John Shadegg) so Bob Cusack decided to revive another legendary story of Emanuel's inability to read a simple political equation. This one has too do with how out of touch he is with a cultural phenomena as powerful as the Colbert Report. Cusack's report that Democrats appearing on the show benefit flies in the face of Emanuel's diktat that Democrats stay away from the hugely popular, cutting edge program and stick to less controversial venues-- like Fox News.

Democratic politicians enjoy a major spike in political contributions after appearing on Comedy Central’s The Colbert Report, according to a new study.

Political scientist James Fowler of the University of California, San Diego found that Democrats receive a 40 percent increase in contributions in the month after appearing on the fake-news show. But Republicans, Fowler concludes, “essentially gain nothing,” according to a release.

Fowler’s analysis finds “that Democrats who appear on 'The Colbert Report' enjoy a significant increase in the number and total amount of donations they receive over the next 30-40 days when compared to similar candidates who do not appear on the show. Specifically, Democrats who come on the program raise $8,247 more than colleagues who don’t do so on the 32nd day following their appearance.”

The Fowler analysis cites the fundraising of many House members who have appeared on The Colbert Report, including Democratic Reps. Barney Frank (MA), Adam Schiff (CA), John Hall (NY), and John Yarmuth (KY).

It was originally progressive, anti-war freshman Steve Cohen (D-TN) who Emanuel warned away from Colbert. Cohen, wisely, ignored Emanuel's tone-deaf advise and appeared on the show. Last week Emanuel tacitly supported a right-wing pseudo-Democrat, Nikki Tinker, against Cohen in a bitter primary. Emanuel was embarrassed when Tinker ran a viciously anti-Semitic, racist campaign bristling with Karl Rove talking points. Cohen ended her political pretensions when she came up a little short (18.64%). No doubt Emanuel is taking credit for Cohen's win. Now... who will end Emanuel's political pretensions?

Don't Hate On EMILY's List-- More On Harold Ford's Nikki Tinker

Everyone is entitled to make a mistake and it was damn Christian of EMILY's list to publicly puke on their worst endorsement of the year-- anti-Semitic Blue Dog Nikki Tinker-- just hours before the polls opened in Memphis this morning. I noticed that the papers in Memphis covered it and I sure hope women who admire and respect EMILY's List get the message before they vote for a reactionary bigot like Tinker over Steve Cohen, someone who's world view-- if not his plumbing-- is far more in sync with EMILY's List than Tinkers'.

Even Mr. Hope made a statement about the election this morning in Tennessee's 9th CD. Look how courageous Barack Obama is. He offers me more reasons to not bother to vote every single day:

"These incendiary and personal attacks have no place in our politics, and will do nothing to help the good people of Tennessee. It's time to turn the page on a politics driven by negativity and division so that we can come together to lift up our communities and our country."

Just one missing sentence. He could have used the one he employed to make sure the single most Republican Democrat in Congress, John Barrow, was re-elected over a progressive African-American state Senator in Georgia a few weeks ago.

That said, everyone at Blue America World Headquarters was thrilled today when EMILY's List announced their newest endorsements. Most of them are Blue America faves: Sam Bennett (D-PA), Judy Feder (D-VA), Annette Taddeo (D-FL), and Vic Wulsin (D-OH). "These Democratic women," said EMILY's List president Ellen Malcolm, "are running some of the most exciting, competitive challenger races in the country and gaining critical ground in historically Republican districts.  Ranging from doctors, businesswomen, and public servants, these women are leading the way on issues affecting American families every day. EMILY's list members are proud to support these Democratic women and help elect them to the United States House in November."


Let's hope the politics of reactionary divisiveness is defeated in Memphis today and we can all celebrate EMILY's List emergence on the Side of Light. I love their write-up on Annette:

A small business owner and a community leader, Annette Taddeo is running for Congress because she believes South Florida needs a new beginning. As founder and CEO of LanguageSpeak, Taddeo has a 15 year track record as a successful businesswoman and was named Businesswoman of the Year by the South Florida Business Journal and one of the top 50 Latina entrepreneurs in the country by Hispanic Magazine. Taddeo is also a strong advocate for women as the chair of the Women's Enterprise National Council's Leadership Forum and a National Founding Partner and member of the executive board of WIPP-- Women Impacting Public Policy.

Taddeo's priorities reflect the values of the 18th district. She has already raised more than every recent Democratic challenger in this seat combined and the district is seeing historic increases in Democratic voter registration. Annette Taddeo's leadership, experience, and dedication to her community will make her a valuable voice for the working families she will represent in Congress.

 


UPDATE: TINKER GOT THE CRUSHING SHE EARNED

When the absentee ballots were counted about 90 minutes after the polls closed, Cohen had 81% of the vote. It never went below 79% and his winning total was 79.34%. Once the most vile snake in Memphis, Harold Ford, saw the handwriting on the wall (or in the polls) he quickly threw his protegee under the bus. Tinker finished with 18.64% and a very sour taste in the mouths of everyone who supported her. Rahm Emanuel, Nancy Pelosi and Steny Hoyer owe Steve Cohen a public apology.

It was interesting that before Tinker let loose with her barrage of vicious, racist, Republican-like negative ads Cohen was only leading with 65%. Negative ads work with Republican voters, not so much with Democratic voters. "It says Memphis has come a long, long way and that people who were counting on racial voting to prevail are thinking of a Memphis that doesn't exist anymore," Cohen said. "The people of Memphis are more sophisticated voters that deal with issues and someone's record and not simply race."

In November Cohen will once again face the lowliest of all the Ford family, Harold much-hated brother Jake. In 2006 Jake managed to garner 18% of the vote. He'll do worse this year.

Today Is Primary Day In Memphis-- Please Vote

Last night Keith Olbermann named Nikki Tinker "The Worst Person In The World." I think she's just a garden variety Republican hack, not any better or worse than the rest of them. It's just that she's running as a Democrat. Yesterday we talked about why her Harold Ford-backed anti-Semitic, racist, homophobic campaign against progressive Congressman Steve Cohen is such a disgrace and why EMILY's List essentially de-endorsed her within hours of the opening of the polls. Nancy Pelosi, Rahm Emanuel, Steny Hoyer and Chris Van Hollen should be ashamed to have not come to the aid of Rep. Cohen-- they make me sick-- against this reactionary bigot whose closing issue of the campaign is a pure Rovian appeal that the Godless Jew, Cohen, is opposed to letting little children pray to God in school. If she wins, which is unlikely, I hope the Democratic leadership chokes on her. Here's what Olbermann had to say:

Yesterday's Primaries-- And A Preview For Tomorrow's Primary In Memphis

Judy Baker, progressive victor in Missouri

Kansas, Missouri and Michigan all had primaries yesterday. Mostly incumbents and Establishment favorites won their races. The stupidest candidate who ran for Congress in any district in any state for either party, Brock Olivo in the Missouri district (MO-09) being abandoned by Kenny Hulsdorf, got wiped out. He came in 4th. If you want to understand why, watch the video at that link back there. What I can't understand is why 4,637 Republicans (10%) voted for him. Blaine Luetkemeyer won the GOP nod with 39%, beating Bob Onder in a bloody, vicious contest between two extremists, and progressive state Senator Judy Baker beat former Missouri House Speaker Steve Gaw (42%-33%) to take the Democratic nomination. It's a very Republican, very white district (PVI is R+7) and includes "Little Dixie." Kerry scored 41% of the vote in 2004.

In the Missouri governor's race, Democratic homophobe Jay Nixon won his primary handily, as was expected, and he will face Kenny Hulsdorf who barely managed (49-45%) to edge by Sarah Steelman for the GOP nod. Nixon is favored to win in November but after his most recent outburt of homophobic hysteria some of his financial support dried up.

There were two congressional races in Michigan people were watching and one in Kansas. The KS-02 race looked like it would be a re-match between radical right lunatic (and ex-Congressman) Jim Ryun and incumbent moderate Democrat, Nancy Boyda. But it appears that Ryun went down to a narrow defeat-- 51-49%-- to Lynn Jenkins. It's a pretty red district but Boyda has done a good job, is known as very independent-minded, and hasn't given the voters any reason to vote her out of office. A side show in Kansas was ex-Attorney General Phill Kline's running for re-election as District Attorney in Johnson County. He's the titular head of the Nazi-faction of the Kansas GOP and he had his head handed to him by a mainstream conservative, Steve Howe.

In Michigan's 7th CD, state Senator and Blue America-endorsee Mark Schauer beat a perennial vanity candidate-- who was the party nominee in 2006-- 66-34%. Schauer will face far right extremist Tim Walberg, a freshman, in November. The more complicated race was in MI-13, where incumbent Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick, mother of Detroit's unpopular, hapless and indicted mayor, drew two opponents, Mary Waters and Martha Scott. Aside from being the mother of the reviled mayor, Kilpatrick was a die-hard Hillary supporter, something that went over badly among African-American voters in MI-13, who overwhelmingly and enthusiastically supported Obama. It was neck and neck all night-- with Waters ahead most of the night-- until Kilpatrick's home turf came in late and put her ahead. She raised around $800,000 and her closest opponent, Waters, raised around $10,000.

The other hot race today was the Democratic senatorial primary run-off in Georgia. Moderate ex-state Rep. Jim Martin beat reactionary loon Vernon Jones, 59-41%. He'll be facing extremist Saxby Chambliss, one of Bush's most dependable Senate rubber stamps in November.

Rep. Steve Cohen & Obama

Tennessee holds its primary tomorrow and all eyes are on Memphis, where progressive freshman Steve Cohen, who is white and Jewish, is being challenged by a vicious anti-Semitic, racist pawn of ex-Congressman Harold Ford. It's been a very ugly race-- and the ugliness is all on one side, Nikki Tinker's. Steve Cohen was first elected in 2006 with the help of Blue America and we have enthusiastically endorsed him again. If you know anyone in Memphis, please call them and talk to them about this race. Cohen has been a real leader for working families and he is the only progressive congressman from Tennessee. Tinker is a complete corporate shill and far more conservative across a wide array of issues. Rahm Emanuel, a longtime ally of Ford's, has encouraged institutional support for Tinker and has prevented his DCCC pawn, Chris Van Hollen, from coming to the aid of Cohen, the way the DCCC and Nancy Pelosi backed other challenged incumbents like Kilpatrick yesterday and Al Wynn a few months ago. One of the most corrupt members of the Democratic Party, Gregory Meeks (NY) has been supporting Tinker, as has Stephanie Tubbs Jones (D-Ohio). More progressive and respectable members of the Congressional Black Caucus like John Conyers and Jesse Jackson, Jr. have been campaigning for Cohen.


EMILY's List Embarrassed By Nikki Tinker's Racist Campaign

We were pretty disappointed when EMILY's List came out for Nikki Tinker in her anti-semitic, homophobic, racist jihad to turn a solidly Blue district reddish. I think they wish they had never gotten involved with this campaign of bigotry. The following statement was issued by Ellen Malcolm, president of EMILY's List, in response to recent ads run by the Nikki Tinker for Congress campaign: 
 
"We were shocked to see the recent ads run by the Nikki Tinker for Congress campaign.  We believe the ads are offensive and divisive.  EMILY's List does not condone or support these types of attacks."

Next time DLC Chair Harold Ford makes a recommendation, take it with a grain of salt.

END OF THE QUARTER-- ONLY GIVE TO ANTI-ESTABLISHMENT PROGRESSIVES, NO DCCC-BACKED CANDIDATES TODAY

Today is the "last day of the quarter," a bogus and arbitrary milepost set up by sometimes unwitting but always dedicated enemies of democracy, the DCCC, DSCC, NRSC, NRCC, etc. It's their very successful method of ginning up cascades of grassroots donations for the pernicious little insider game of politician career advancement, and they use it to drive candidates-- even more than donors-- crazy. In the last week I've had over 100 urgent e-mails and far too many expensive, money-wasting snail mail pleas for donations. And the frequency is accelerating today. Even Blue Dogs, to whom I have explained that I don't donate to Republicans or Blue Dogs, have been sending their entreaties.

To date, Blue America has collected nearly $1.3 million for progressive candidates and causes, none of it for the DCCC, DSCC, NRSC or NRCC, all of which are anti-progressive and, to varying degrees, outright reactionary, the latter two in all ways and the former two at the minimum process-wise. The DCCC is especially interested in Blue America's assistance with raising money for the candidates who are progressive enough to be on our candidate list and who wear the Democratic Party label. That isn't what we plan to do today.

Instead, I want to urge DWT readers to donate to Democratic Party candidates the DCCC fears and wishes would go away.

First and foremost there is state Senator Regina Thomas who is on the front lines battling against a reactionary Democratic shill, Rep. John Barrow in GA-12. Their primary is July 15, and it is a long-shot attempt by a grassroots progressive to oust a conservative, corporate yes man. Barrow is loaded with loot from lobbyists and from the corporate special interests-- like the telecom corporations-- who he supports instead of his own constituents. Regina doesn't have one cent to spend other than what has been raised for her through the grassroots and netroots. She has won her state legislative seats by grassroots campaigning. Inside the Beltway, it is believed she has no chance because she refuses to spend her time and energy begging for money from interest groups and wealthy donors. They're probably right. It's the fundamental tragedy of our political system. Last month she had nothing. This week she has over $40,000 (average donation around $25).

There are four other primaries looming that pit progressive grassroots candidates against insider hacks. Howard Shanker and Alan Grayson are two phenomenally good candidates in Arizona and Florida battling against the odds to beat Establishment-backed conservatives. The DCCC has already violated its own rules by pushing a hapless and clueless state legislator in Arizona against the independent-minded Shanker. In the Orlando race, Grayson is up against a worthless conservative who has far more in common with Republicans than with Democrats. Even the DCCC sees that and has avoided endorsing in that race. Jon Powers is a progressive Iraq War vet campaigning for an open GOP seat in the suburbs between Buffalo and Rochester, against a self-funding millionaire who stands for nothing except a personal desire to have the title "Rep" in front of his name and against a former attorney for the Love Canal (who gave campaign contributions to the Republican Jon has frightened out of running again).

Finally, in Memphis the reactionary forces of former Rep. Harold Ford, now president of the Republican wing of the Democratic Party (the DLC), are trying for a comeback against exemplary Congressman Steve Cohen. Steve is a freshman who has proven himself to be a relentless fighter on behalf of regular folks against Big Business. The Ford allies are using Nikki Tinker as their cat's paw to win back the district, and Tinker is backed by several insider organizations with heavy financing. Steve has earned our trust and deserves our backing.

Times are tough and will probably get tougher. But if you can afford to donate today, please consider these five progressives in tough primary battles against the forces of reaction: Regina Thomas in Georgia, Howard Shanker in Arizona, Alan Grayson in Florida, Jon Powers in upstate New York, and Steve Cohen in Tennessee. Here's the place you can make your contribution. When times do get tougher, these are the people we need in Congress, not more insiders blindly and relentlessly serving the interests of insiders.


DCCC DOES SOMETHING RIGHT

They're running some ads in 13 districts where the Republican incumbents have been bought out by Big Oil and have voted for Big Oil's agenda straight down the line. Although some of the challengers are typical DCCC schnooks, they are also going after some awful Republicans being challenged by great progressives like Vic Wulsin (OH-02), Larry Kissell (NC-08), Sam Bennett (PA-10), Dr. Steve Porter (PA-03), Dennis Shulman (NJ-05), and Tom Perriello (VA-05). The ad is fairly mediocre, but I'm sure some Inside the Beltway consultants think it will help, and they may well be right. You can hear it at the link above.

THE REST OF THE PRIMARY SEASON-- PLUS A DWT MONEY MATCH FOR REGINA THOMAS

It is rare that a congressional incumbent loses a primary battle. In 2006 it happened twice-- mainstream conservative Republican Joe Schwarz lost to raving right-wing maniac Tim Walberg in Michigan and controversial Cynthia McKinney-- a victim of a media pile on-- was beaten by Hank Johnson. Schwarz v Walberg was a completely ideological and the McKinney v Johnson race had a different dynamic.

So far in 2008 there have been 3 incumbents beaten in primaries: progressive leader Donna Edwards vanquished a corrupt Insider in Maryland and two mainstream conservative Republicans, Wayne Gilchrest and Chris Cannon, were beaten by extreme right fanatics, Andy Harris and Jason Chaffetz, respectively in Maryland and Utah.

This morning's CQPolitics lists 8 more primaries in this cycle with potential upsets. First and foremost, of course, is the challenge underfunded grassroots progressive state Senator Regina Thomas is giving the most reactionary Democrat in the entire House, Blue Dog John Barrow in GA-12. According to CQ "racial demographics are a factor in this sprawling east Georgia district, which includes areas in and around Augusta and Savannah. Two-term Democratic Rep. John Barrow, who is white, faces a primary challenge from state Sen. Regina Thomas, who is African-American and is seeking to galvanize support from black residents who make up 45 percent of the district’s population... Challenger Thomas may be further hindered on the money front." Barrow is a special interests rep, taking massive contributions from every big corporation looking to buy a vote. Most recently, for example, he was a recipient of a great deal of money from the telecom industry looking for enough Democrats to cross the aisle and vote like Republicans to grant their criminal executives retroactive immunity. Barrow helped provide them with the margin they needed-- and helped fill his warchest. He has more than $1.3 million dollars on hand. Regina has only the $38,000 that have been donated to her through ActBlue. She isn't worried because her electoral career has never been about money and she has always won in the Savannah area by running grassroots campaigns.

The other hot primary in Georgia, on July 15, like Regina v Barrow, is on the GOP side, where extreme right wing loon Paul Broun, with one of the most breathtakingly fascist voting records in Congress, is being challenged by state Rep. Barry Fleming who says Broun far enough to the right. His voting Progressive Punch voting score is 0.55 (out of 100), making him the 435th most progressive member of Congress (out of 435). In other words, he is further right than any other member of Congress from Georgia or anywhere else. And he's being challenged for not being a "true conservative." Yes, these people are bat-shit crazy. (Broun even joined 16 other die hard psycho-paths to vote against the Americans With Disabilities Act this week.) Democrats in the district are hoping that the spectacle of the two far right nuts, Broun and Fleming battling for the far right, will turn voters off enough in GA-10 so that Iraq War vet Bobby Saxon beats whichever damaged Repug washes up to face him in November.

August 5 features a contentious Democratic primary in Detroit (MI-13) where the incumbent, Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick, is the mother of the controversial and wildly unpopular mayor, Kwame Kilpatrick. She has to face two well-know challengers trying to hold her accountable for her son, state Sen. Martha Scott and former state Rep. Mary Waters.

Two days later there is a really important race in Memphis, where progressive incumbent Steve Cohen is facing a challenge from the right. Nikki Tinker supporters have run an anti-semitic, anti-white, and typically Republican campaign against Cohen.

But Cohen faces a greater degree of difficulty than Republican Davis across the state, in the form of his district’s demographics. Cohen, who is white, represents a district where about three-fifths of the residents are black. The district had been represented by black Democrats, the father-son combo of Harold E. Ford (1975-97) and Harold Ford Jr. (1997-2007), for the previous 32 years. Some black activists argued Cohen, the only major white candidate in the 2006 primary, won only because the black vote was fractured among multiple candidates.

That proposition will be tested in this year’s primary in which Cohen has drawn four African-American opponents — including airline executive Nikki Tinker, his closest competitor in 2006, when she took 25 percent of the Democratic vote. Some members of the Congressional Black Caucus have already donated to Tinker’s campaign. But Cohen has the advantage of incumbency and strong support from prominent members of the local black community, as well as some leading black colleagues in Washington, such as Ways and Means Chairman Charles B. Rangel of New York.

In the eastern part of Tennessee (TN-01) a couple of wing nuts are also having a primary. Far right freshman David Davis is being challenged by Johnson City Mayor Phil Roe, who nearly beat him in 2006 and has been pointing out that he reeks of corruption, taking money from every special interest under the sun and then voting for whatever they like. This is true of 95% of Republicans and nearly a third of the Democrats. But people in the district can only vote against (of for) one member of Congress and it would be a good sign if Davis is defeated. Needless to say, he's loaded with cash.

The August 12 primary in Colorado features a three way race pitting extremist kook Doug Lamborn against 2 other right-wing Republicans. It doesn't matter who wins. Although it would be great to see someone as extremist as Lamborn be driven out of politics.

August 26 has a major primary in Alaska which Phil Munger covered for us in great detail on Monday. Basically it looks like one of Congress' most corrupt Republicans, Don Young, who has been in the seat since 1973, will be defeated by an equally conservative but even stupider Lt. Gov. Sean Parnell. Parnell, though, is supported by the popular governor, Sarah Palin and that is probably the death knell for Young's ill-starred career. On the same day Democratic insider Ethan Berkowitz faces grassroots progressive Diane Benson and the winner of that race win go up against either Young or Parnell. Rahm Emanuel and the most corrupt elements of the Democratic Party in DC are behind Berkowitz.

Primary season wraps up on September 6 with another corrupt member of Congress trying to hold on to his seat, this time a Democrat, William Jefferson in New Orleans. "Jefferson is seeking re-election even though he faces 16 federal bribery and corruption charges related to his business dealings with companies seeking contracts in Africa. His trial is tentatively scheduled to begin on Dec. 2." In 2006 he managed to survive a challenge from fellow Democrats with the cynical help of Republicans from Meterie. It is unclear-- like almost everything regarding Louisiana politics, who will be running against Jefferson in September.

It is clear that there are two progressive Democrats who need our help, Congressman Steve Cohen and state Senator Regina Thomas. I urge you to donate generously to both of them but there is a special incentive today. A generous DWT reader has offered to match all donations for Regina up to $500 at the Blue America ActBlue page. Please give. Barrow has been one of Bush's most reliable votes on keeping the war going and on all the little tricks Bush has pulled, like granting retroactive immunity to his cronies.