A Conservative Is A Conservative, Whether He Calls Himself A Republican Or A Democrat And It Doesn't Matter If He Passes Himself Off As A "Moderate"-- They Own All Society's Problems

The two parties aren't "the same." Democrats aren't the same as Republicans. There are some good Democrats. There are no good Republicans. The identity politics Democratic politicians play-- pro-woman, pro-gay, anti-racism, for example-- is better, way better, than the identity politics Republicans play. As for corruption... well corruption is part of, and even lionized by, conservatism. Liberals at least feel guilty about their own corruption, for whatever that's worth.

When he was younger than I am now, my grandfather told me that the only thing worse than a Democrat is a Republican. I'd say he hit that one out of the park. A few days ago, The Independent published an OpEd by North Carolina academics Kevin Singer and Alyssa Rockenbach, People worry that 'moderate' Democrats like Joe Biden are the same as Republicans. Our study suggests they may be right. They offered a new set of criteria to look at politicians. It helps explain why there is so much energy around the Republicans for Biden movement right now and so much more enthusiasm from that direction than from progressives, who generally dislike him less than they dislike Trump and will hold their noses and vote for him, deceiving themselves into thinking they will be able to have an impact on his neoliberal agenda after he's in the White House.

Friday, we put together a ritual denunciation of consevative Democrats-- misnamed "moderates" by the media and misguided academics like Singer and Rockenbach-- who had just accepted, and celebrated, endorsements by the very right-wing U.S. Chamber of Commerce. Singer and Rockenbach, though, address the idealization of "moderatism" as the ultimate political virtue. "When it comes to addressing climate change," they wrote, "Eric Levitz of New York Magazine argued that 'a major [obstacle] is the tendency of moderate Democrats to mistake their own myopic complacency for heroic prudence.' Political researcher David Adler found that across Europe and North America, centrists are the least supportive of democracy, the least committed to its institutions, and the most supportive of authoritarianism. Furthermore, Adler found that centrists are the least supportive of free and fair elections as well as civil rights-- in the United States, only 25 percent of centrists agree that civil rights are an essential feature of democracy. This finding dovetails with observations made by Martin Luther King Jr. in his letter from Birmingham Jail: 'I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the… great stumbling block in the stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen’s Councilor or the Klu Klux Klanner, but the white moderate who is more devoted to ‘order’ than to justice.' Even Arthur Books, a self-avowed moderate, admits to 'the failure of the mainstream, moderate, progressive formula for how to create a more equal pluralist America,' adding, 'I’m a moderate guy, but the evidence doesn’t support moderation when it comes to racial equity.' That’s all well and good. But what does the data show?"

They reported on a study of beliefs and attitudes of college students across the country (IDEALS) and found that "as America battles a global pandemic and an economic collapse and reckons with systemic racism, IDEALS suggests that moderate men may be the least likely to make a positive difference. When broken down by political leaning, IDEALS found that moderate male students in their senior year were time and again the least likely, or among the least likely, to somewhat or strongly agree with the following statements":

Strikingly, in almost every case, the responses of moderate men are very similar to conservative men and women. Their level of agreement with the statements above is as much as 14 percent lower than moderate women, who are more likely than men to lean Democratic, or liberal men and women.

This IDEALS finding is on par with a recent Gallup study encompassing over 29,000 interviews with American adults, which revealed that moderates and conservatives remain closely aligned in their ideological preferences.

This raises important questions heading into the election: Is a moderate male candidate a bait-and-switch for Democratic voters? Are they actually casting their votes for a conservative?

That moderate men most resemble Republicans has been confirmed, of all places, on dating apps. Brittany Wong of HuffPost writes, “It’s almost become a coastal cliche at this point: If someone lists their political views as ‘moderate’ on a dating app, the thinking goes, go ahead and assume the person is a conservative.” One interviewee noted, “It’s just in my experience, even ‘moderate’ guys tend to have extremely different views on topics that matter to me, like gun control, women’s reproductive rights and immigration.” Sometimes, moderate men who appear to bend liberal turn out to be “faux woke,” according to one interviewee who was initially attracted to someone whose profile featured photos at a women’s march. Eventually “he slowly started to drop his facade,” revealing behaviors inconsistent with his professed political beliefs.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has grown increasingly frustrated with moderate Democrats during her tenure, saying at a recent event, “The Democratic Party is not a left party. The Democratic Party is a center or a center-conservative party.” Her [ex] chief of staff, Saikat Chakrabarti, recently deleted a tweet comparing two moderate Democrat coalitions-- consisting mostly of men-- to Southern Democrats who favored segregation and opposed civil rights. During this election cycle, a recurring criticism of Vice President Biden has been his record on school desegregation.

To be sure, Vice President Biden also aligns with more progressive Democrats on key policy issues, prompting Paul Waldman of the Washington Post to assert, “Biden is getting more progressive in substance, yet it has done nothing to change his image as a moderate.”

Nevertheless, Biden’s popularity among Republicans has grown consistently in recent months. A number of prominent former GOP officials, and even some of Trump’s ex-staffers, have voiced their support for Biden, including former Governor John Kasich and former Senator Jeff Flake. Their support, however, seems less driven by the good things they believe Biden will do, and more by the bad things they believe Biden won’t do. In his speech at the Democratic National Convention, for example, Kasich remarked that Republicans and Independents may fear that Biden will “turn sharp left and leave them behind,” but assured viewers, “I don't believe that.”

Let's take San Diego City Council president Georgette Gómez, a congressional candidate-- running for an open seat being contested by an hereditary multimillionaire conservative Democrat-- as an example. Gómez has been endorsed by the Congressional Progressive Caucus, while the Wall Street-owned and operated New Dem Caucus has embraced and endorsed her opponent, Sara Jacobs, granddaughter of mega-GOP donor Irwin Jacobs, whose money is largely financing her campaign against Gómez. Jacobs stands for nothing at all except getting elected. In the primary, she pretended to be a progressive-- a laugh-- and now she is showing her true colors as another corporate suck-up, opposing everything and anything that will help working families.

Ed Case-- The Silver Spike Must Have Been Aluminum

The best member of Congress from Hawaii was Patsy Mink-- a legendary FDR progressive-- served in Congress from 1965 2002, with a break to serve in the Carter administration. She was the first woman of color to be elected to Congress, as well as the first Asian-American woman elected to Congress. And a stalwart progressive. In 2002 she was succeeded by Hawaii's worst member of Congress, Blue Dog Ed Case, who served from Mink's death in 2002 until 2007 when he unsuccessfully challenged progressive U.S.Senator Daniel Akaka for his Senate seat. since then he's run against progressives several times and has always lost.

Finally, after being beaten by Mazie Hirono, in 2012, the Joe Liberman of Hawaii announced his political career was finally over. Now he's running again, for Congress, against Hawaii's most progressive political leader, Kaniela Soto Ing. Ironically, he'll probably make it easier for Ing to win, since he is now the 4th conservative Democrat to jump into the race, joining Donna Kim, Doug Chin and Beth Fukumoto.

In 2011 I wrote about Case:

Although he had one of the worst attendance records of any member of Congress, he consistently supported the GOP on job-killing trade legislation and on special interests legislation like abolishing the estate tax for the super-rich, making it easier for banksters to rip off consumers, screwing over working families on pensions and GOP proposals to shift the tax burden to the middle class. He generally voted with the most reactionary Democrats when they joined the GOP to stifle reform and anyone who likes Chamber of Commerce pawns and Patriot Act-type Dems like Dan Boren and Jim Marshall will be perfectly happy with Ed Case-- especially if xenophobia and war-mongering and making sure that victims of big corporations have no recourse to the courts are your cup of tea to boot.

Monday night news started leaking out that Case is trying it again and wants to run from the Honolulu-based congressional seat. "The 65-year-old Democrat," wrote Nathan Eagle, "pulled nomination papers Monday to run for the 1st Congressional District seat, according to the state Elections Office. He has until the end of business Tuesday to officially file for the Aug. 11 primary ballot."

Schumer Organizes Democratic Collapse on TPP

Chuck Schumer in the 1960s, competing for James Madison High School on the It’s Academic television quiz show (source)

by Gaius Publius

Here's the Washington Post's headline:

Schumer at Center of Democrats’ Trade Drama

But as the article makes clear, "Schumer is at the center of Dem trade drama" is easy code for "Schumer is lead perp for Dem trade collapse." Sen. Chuck Schumer, soon-to-be Leader, got his wish, a Fast Track bill that would pass the Senate, plus a separate currency bill that "pro–billionaire-controlled trade" senators can use for ground cover.

The telling quote:

Of course, the likely outcome is the separate measures will pass out of the Senate, but the currency-related measure faces a rough road in the House and at the White House.

Pro-trade Democrats, though, will be able to say they voted to get tough on trade even as they voted for a six-year fast-track trade bill.

Nice job, Mr. Schumer. Notice both pieces. First, as a separate bill the currency restrictions will pass, but can be vetoed separately from Fast Track. A win for Fast Track. Second, passing the currency bill allows pro-TPP Democrats to brag about how they "tried," useful fog for the campaign trail. Again, nice job, Mr. Schumer.

Now the rest of the Wash Post piece, which contains a fascinating look at the back-and-forth, and the lead architect of that back-and-forth, which will lead to Fast Track passing in the Senate. That lead architect is Chuck Schumer:

Senate Democrats’ epic trade revolt against President Barack Obama’s fast-track bill — and the furious efforts to salvage it — had one senator at the center of it all: Charles E. Schumer.

The New York Democrat, who has become the heir apparent to Minority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada, found himself in an awkward position, to say the least. A provision he authored to get tough on countries that manipulate their currencies was threatening to bring down the White House’s entire trade agenda; its absence on the Senate floor was why Democrats filibustered Obama’s fast-track trade package Tuesday.

By the end of the day Wednesday, the crisis — what White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest kept calling a “procedural snafu” — had been averted, with Schumer helping to seal the deal.

Although the New Yorker has opposed the trade bills — he voted against fast track in committee — as the caucus’ future leader, he has to balance the anti-trade sentiment among the vast majority of Democratic senators with his loyalty to the White House and the desires of a sizable number of pro-trade Democrats, such as Sen. Patty Murray of Washington.

In short, it’s a sign of the kind of leader Schumer will be.

Don't forget to notice "progressive" Patty Murray's role in this. As a member of Democratic leadership, she seems to have had to choose between "following the neo-liberal leader" — in this case, Barack Obama on TPP — and standing with all other progressives in the "Democratic coalition," including every labor union. Murray is choosing to play ball with Senate leadership against progressives. Watch her carefully going forward. This looks a lot like the victory of careerism over principle.

Confirmation that Schumer is playing both sides — pro-billionaire, pro-"progressive" — comes later in the article:

Schumer all along — both in committee and at the microphones Tuesday — said his goal was not to use his currency proposal as a poison pill to kill fast track, which is why he offered it as an amendment to the separate customs bill last month.

The main reason for the explosion of popular joy after the vote that upheld the filibuster was that poison pill. Schumer and the White House (via its late-night meeting with 10 named Democratic senators) re-energized the pro-TPP senators, restiffened their pro-TPP spines. In the end, those ten plus four others (see below) should be more than enough to defeat the next Democratic filibuster.

Who Are the Pro-TPP Democratic Senators?

Wyden has claimed he has 14 senators on his side (Politico Pro; subscription required):

Sen. Ron Wyden, ranking Democrat on the Senate Finance Committee, said earlier today that 14 Democrats were prepared to vote for cloture if there was a clear path for approval of the customs bill.

Ten Democratic senators were named in the White House's press announcement of its post-filibuster meeting. (Politico wrote up the importance of that action here. Note that Politico also serves to turn up that heat on those Democrats with this article as well.)

If Wyden is right, who are the other four? The Hill has named two senators, Feinstein and McCaskill, who were siding with Wyden on "trade." Their names didn't appear on the White House invitation. I think we can add two more names (explained below) to complete the TPP Gang of Fourteen.

So here are your 14 Democratic pro-TPP senators, as I see it. First, from the White House press report, "[t]he following senators attended the meeting":

• Michael Bennet (D-CO)
• Maria Cantwell (D-WA)
• Ben Cardin (D-MD)
• Tom Carper (D-DE)
• Heidi Heitkamp (D-ND)
• Tim Kaine (D-VA)
• Patty Murray (D-WA)
• Bill Nelson (D-FL)
• Mark Warner (D-VA)
• Ron Wyden (D-OR)

Second, from The Hill:

• Dianne Feinstein (D-CA)
• Claire McCaskill (D-MO)

Finally, these two more-or-less obvious names:

• Cory Booker (D-NJ) — who declined to vote on the filibuster
• Chuck Schumer (D-NY) — who helped collapse the resistance

With 54 Republican senators voting Yes to end a filibuster, it would be hard to uphold it when 14 anti-progressive Democrats are willing to vote with them.

JUST IN: The roll-call vote for the second filibuster has been released. The filibuster was defeated 65–33 with two Republicans not voting.

New names on the pro-TPP list: Chris Coons (D-DE), Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH). Since Fast Track proponents had five votes to spare (threshold: 60 votes), I take both as voting as they wished. Booker and Schumer voted No, but their votes weren't needed. Since the floor vote threshold will be a simple majority, I don't expect either to have to show his hand publicly yet.

GP

NY Times Exposes The Garbage Candidates The DCCC Spends All Their Money On

The root of the House Democrats' problem

California freshman Democrat Mark DeSaulnier is the only Member of the House left with a ProgressivePunch crucial vote score of 100. He's never backed any of Boehner's right-wing agenda. Aside from DeSaulnier, the 10 Members who have, over the course of their careers, been the least likely to vote for Republican efforts to undermine America's working families are Mark Pocan (D-WI), Katherine Clark (D-MA), Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), Jim McGovern (D-MA), Judy Chu (D-CA), Raul Grijalva (D-AZ), Donna Edwards (D-MD), Alan Lowenthal (D-CA), Keith Ellison (D-MN) and Nydia Velazquez (D-NY). Way on the other end of the scale, the House Democrats who have the career-long worst ProgressivePunch crucial vote scores-- the ten voting most frequently with the Republican Party against the legitimate interests of working families-- are (with their abysmal scores):

• Gwen Graham (Blue Dog-FL)- 29.42
• Brad Ashford (Blue Dog-NE)- 29.42
• Kyrsten Sinema (Blue Dog-AZ)- 36.67
• Sean Patrick Maloney (New Dem-NY)- 39.52
• Collin Peterson (Blue Dog-MN)- 39.98
• Henry Cuellar (Blue Dog-TX)- 40.54
• Jim Costa (Blue Dog-CA)- 43.85
• Cheri Bustos (Blue Dog-IL)- 44.03
• Patrick Murphy (New Dem-FL)- 45.71
• Raul Ruiz (CA)- 46.03

Each of them has voted more often against progressive legislation than for it. Exposing these false Democrats has been one of the themes of DWT-- a lonely effort overall-- for years. So wasn't I pleasantly surprised yesterday when Derek Willis reported in the NYTimes who the House Democrats are who have been backing the GOP agenda? (Unfortunately, Willis uses crude data that doesn't show the depths of right-wing support these fake Dems have been exhibiting, just their relative ignominy.) It isn't a subject Times readers are normally exposed to and I can imagine that the report absolutely freaked out the DCCC-- not the content, of course, but just that the Members they waste the most money on were exposed, and exposed to nearly the entire DCCC donor base.

Appropriately enough, the piece is accompanied by a photo of political chameleon Kyrsten Sinema, who started her shameful career as a socialist and a Green, posing provocatively. Willis' point isn't just that these treacherous Democrats abandon working families but that they're doing it even more consistently than they used to. And he's most interested in talking about the careerist scum looking for political advancement by selling out progressive values.

A small group of House Democrats has begun moving to the right in the current Congress, breaking from a majority of colleagues on votes that pit lawmakers from liberal areas against those from more rural and conservative districts.

The lure of a Senate seat, which in many cases requires shifting from a narrower ideological focus to a broader one, and the threat of a well-funded challenger are among the reasons for this this shift.

A few members of this group, which numbers fewer than a dozen, are congressional veterans like Collin Peterson of Minnesota, who survived a tough challenge in 2014 and is voting with a majority of his fellow Democrats 64 percent of the time, down slightly from the previous Congress.

But most are new to the House and have known life only in the minority, with Republicans controlling the schedule and agenda. These Democratic lawmakers have voted against Democratic legislation such as the alternative budgets proposed by the Congressional Progressive Caucus and the Congressional Black Caucus.

Their ranks include John Delaney of Maryland, who was first elected in 2012 and narrowly defeated his Republican challenger last fall, and Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona, who won easily in 2014 but may be considering a run for the Senate (and, notably, did not vote for Nancy Pelosi for Speaker of the House in January). Ms. Sinema’s party voting percentage has dropped to 73 percent from 80 percent this year, while Mr. Delaney’s score has fallen further, to 80 percent from 92 percent.

Patrick Murphy of Florida is another example; he’s already running for the Senate seat currently held by the Republican Marco Rubio, and his party voting score has dropped from 83 percent in the last Congress to 77 percent in this one.

Also in the group are four California Democrats who have voted less often with their party in the current Congress than in the previous one, including Julia Brownley, who has joined a majority of Democrats on 84 percent of votes in 2015 compared with 91 percent the previous two years.

...The bills that have attracted the support of the small group of Democrats have included ones that provide tax cuts; support the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline; and change the ways the Environmental Protection Agency and other federal agencies study and approve regulations.

Willis' list of the worst House Democrats:

• Collin Peterson (MN)
• Kyrsten Sinema (AZ)
• Kurt Schrader (OR)
• Jim Costa (CA)
• Patrick Murphy (FL)
• Scott Peters (CA)
• John Delaney (MD)
• Ami Bera (CA)
• Julia Brownley (CA)

A motley collection of political cowards, many of them claim they vote with Republicans because their seats are in jeopardy in "moderate" districts, although each of them won those districts campaigning on progressive values. None of them will acknowledge that their seats are in jeopardy because they vote with Republicans so much and have managed to alienate their own support base.

Unbearable Noodge Watch: This "one more chance" business -- not cool, DNC!

No, no, no, no! Or to put it another way, uh-uh, no!

by Ken

I could have sworn we had this discussion the other day. Remember, after you promised I'd had my "last chance to become a card-carrying Democrat"? "Presumably as of midnight I'm in the clear!" I wrote. "Even if that was Pacific Time, and I wouldn't be at all surprised if it was, I'm still good. Free! Free at last!" As I wrote, "I never expressed any interest that I'm aware of in becoming a card-carrying Democrat," but I was prepared to let bygones be bygones -- on the understanding that this "card-carrying Democrat" business was really and truly over.

Now comes this "one more chance" business," and I'm throwing my penalty flag.

I expect you're pretty busy people, you DNC folks. Why, it must take you untold hours to dream up all those horrible fund-raising e-mails you dump into our mailboxes, even though none of the people I know believe you care about any of the things that matter to us, with the possible exception that those Republicans are sure a horror show, aren't they? But we don't consider that much of a basis for political kinship.

Like I was saying, I imagine you're busy folks, so it seems quite likely that you haven't read our colleague Noah's Saturday post:



Noah was steamed about the Senate vote to approve the Keystone XL Pipeline,

a project that would seize private property from American-citizen landowners through the heartland of our country. Many landowners have turned down offers of very large six-figure sums of money from oil interests to allow the companies to build the pipeline across their property and over the nation's largest aquifer. Think about that. What could go wrong?

Oil companies and their bought-and-paid-for minions in Congress -- who, unlike real Americans, never saw even a single dollar, let alone six figures, they wouldn't gladly pocket -- tell us that carting the world's dirtiest, Canadian oil through the pipeline will be safe and that carting it by train is not always safe. On Thursday, the $enate voted to approve the pipeline, by a margin of 62 to 36, ignoring the fact that three pipelines have burst in the past two weeks.

What Noah was most steamed about was the inclusion among the 62 "yea" votes of nine Democrats. The Keystone Nine, you'll recall, are Senators Bennet (Colorado), Carper (Delaware), Casey (Pennsylvania), Donnelly (Indiana), Heitkamp (North Dakota), Manchin (West Virginia, site of the most recent of those three pipelines that have burst in recent weeks), McCaskill (Missouri), Tester (Montana), and Warner (Virginia). As Noah pointed out, this voting bloc puts the pipelinistas within vote-counting range of a veto-overridable Senate majority.

I expect the DNC doesn't consider it its place to comment on the "Democratic values" exemplified by the Keystone Nine. Which is just one reason why the DNC and I don't have much to talk about.

POINT OF ORDER, PLEASE, DNC



This card you've been talking about -- you remember, the one that was to make each responding sap a "card-carrying member of the Democratic Party." That was the deal, wasn't it?) Now I don't happen to be in the market for such a card, but looking at this sample, may I note that I don't see any mention anywhere on it of any "Democratic Party." I guess in some shorthandish way the idea is that the "Democratic National Committee" is authorized to bestow membership in the party. But I went to college, and graduated, and I don't see any such story here.

A MOMENT IN THE COUNTDOWN FROZEN IN TIME



Am I getting through here, DNC? That would surprise me. Nevertheless, I thought I'd ask.

#

Rahm Emanuel-- The Root Of All Evil?

Yesterday 4 horrible reactionary Blue Dogs-- Kyrsten Sinema (AZ), Dan Lipinski (IL), Jim Cooper (TN) and Gwen Graham (FL)-- broke ranks with their fellow Democrats to vote against Nancy Pelosi as Speaker. Graham is new to Congress, but very ambitious and eager to jump to statewide office as soon as she can by proving how "bipartisan" she is; the other 3 vote with Boehner on crucial issues far more than they vote with Pelosi anyway. How do we get Democrats as bad as Sinema, Cooper, Lipinksi and Graham? Good question; all 4 belong in the Republican Party. (Sinema started out running for office as a Green and a Socialist and has changed her political stripes instantly on any issue she thought would profit her ugly careerist ambitions. Last session she had the single worst voting record of any current Democrat in the House.)

The idea that Democrats can get away with this kind of behavior is traceable right back to the king of the Republican wing of the Democratic Party, transactional corporate whore and über-unpopular Chicago mayor Rahm Emanuel, once head of the DCCC-- and the man who showed Democrats that they could spit in the eye of the party base and still prosper. Yesterday, Chicago blogger Fred Klonsky warned his readers that Emanuel wasn't just encouraging corrupt conservative Democrats but that he was using his mammoth corporate warchest to try to defeat local progressives.

Alderman Scott Waguespack has been "a leading voice of the small Progressive Caucus in the Chicago City Council. His has been a voice against the corporate agenda of the Mayor. He voted no on the Mayor’s budget." There are 8 members of the City Council Rahm is trying to defeat, especially Waguespack and Toni Foulkes. Other members of the progressive caucus include Bob Fioretti, who is running against Emanuel, Leslie Hairston, Roderick Sawyer, Ricardo Munoz, Nick Sposato and John Arena.

Members of the City Council’s Progressive Caucus have denounced the $2.2 million super PAC created to re-elect Mayor Rahm Emanuel and his City Council allies as a bullying attempt to stifle dissent by “taking out” its eight members.

On Tuesday, “Chicago Forward” proved them right by making two of eight Caucus members its first targets: Aldermen Toni Foulkes (15th) and Scott Waguespack (32nd).

In a costly direct-mail piece going out this week, “Chicago Forward” is targeting Waguespack for casting one of four “no” votes against a 2015 budget that raised the city’s parking tax again to generate $10 million needed to double the year-round army assigned to patch potholes and repair crumbling streets.

...We need to keep and expand the Progressive Caucus.

Blue America's first candidate for 2015 is Jesus "Chuy" Garcia, the candidate most likely to defeat Emanuel's reelection efforts. If you'd like to help him do that... here's the place.

Will Their Opposition To Obamacare Help Defeat Any Of The Last Wretched Blue Dogs In Congress?

Georgia Blue Dog John Barrow has one of the most reactionary voting records of any Democrat in Congress-- to the point where he defines the term "DINO," Democrat in Name Only. For 2013-14, ProgressivePunch has scored him a dismal 27.73, just fractionally worse from Utah Blue Dog, Jim Matheson who decided to retire rather than face certain defeat in November. Three principled conservative Republicans have more progressive scores than Barrow: Justin Amash (MI-29.09), Chris Gibson (NY-40.00) and Walter Jones (NC-41.23). His overall voting record, for a Democrat is putrid.

That hasn't stopped the DCCC from dedicating a significant amount of money to try to reelect him in November. In the first round of TV time reservations, Barrow's fellow Blue Dog, DCCC chair Steve Israel, has reserved $490,000 on Augusta broadcast and cable from Sept. 2 to Oct. 6, and $670,000 on Savannah broadcast from Sept. 9 to Oct. 6, a total of $1,160,000 one of the biggest commitments to anyone running for Congress in 2014.

The slick graphic up top is community outreach to African-Americans in Augusta. It's a Health Fair! Of course, if it were up to Barrow, his constituents could die in the streets for all he cared-- but before election day, he suddenly takes a big interest his Augusta African-American constituents. He votes against their interests for 20 months and 4 months before election day he feigns concern. Barrow was one of only 4 Democrats who voted against the Affordable Care Act who hasn't be kicked out of Congress.

On March 21, 2010, Barrow voted with all 178 Republicans and 34 wretched Blue Dogs and New Dems to deny health care to poor people. The bill passed 219-212, a close call. Most of the right-wing Democrats lost their seats 8 months later because their Democratic bases refused to come to the polls to reelect them; it was the Great Blue Dog Apocalypse. These were the NO votes:

• John Adler (Blue Dog-NJ)- defeated, then killed by God
• Jason Altmire (Blue Dog-PA)- defeated in a primary
• Mike Arcuri (Blue Dog-NY)- defeated
• John Barrow (Blue Dog-GA)- hanging on by a thread
• Marion Berry (Blue Dog-AR)- retired rather than face certain defeat
• Dan Boren (Blue Dog-OK)- retired rather than face certain defeat
• Rick Boucher (VA)- defeated
• Bobby Bright (Blue Dog-AL)- defeated
• Ben Chandler (Blue Dog-KY)- defeated
• Travis Childers (Blue Dog-MS)- defeated
• Artur Davis (New Dem-AL)- defeated in gubernatorial primary/switched parties
• Lincoln Davis (Blue Dog-TN)- defeated (by GOP medical rapist Scott Desjarlais)
• Chet Edwards (TX)- defeated (in a landslide)
• Stephanie Herseth Sandlin (Blue Dog-SD)- defeated
• Tim Holden (Blue Dog-PA)- defeated in a primary
• Larry Kissell (Blue Dog-NC)- defeated
• Frank Kratovil (Blue Dog-MD)- defeated
• Dan Lipinski (Blue Dog-IL)- still waiting to be primaried
• Stephen Lynch (MA)- defeated by a progressive in a Senate primary
• Jim Marshall (Blue Dog-GA)- defeated
• Jim Matheson (Blue Dog-UT)- retiring this year rather than face certain defeat
• Mike McIntyre (Blue Dog-NC)- retiring this year rather than face certain defeat
• Mike McMahon (Blue Dog-NY)- defeated by mafioso Michael "Mikey Suits" Grimm
• Charlie Melancon (Blue Dog-LA)- lost Senate race
• Walt Minnick (Blue Dog-ID)- defeated
• Glenn Nye (Blue Dog-VA)- defeated
• Collin Peterson (Blue Dog-MN)- hanging on/DCCC triage
• Mike Ross (Blue Dog-AR)- retired rather than face certain defeat
• Heath Shuler (Blue Dog-NC)- retired rather than face certain defeat
• Ike Skelton (MO)- defeated
• Zach Space (Blue Dog-OH)- defeated
• John Tanner (Blue Dog-TN)- retired rather than face certain defeat
• Gene Taylor (Blue Dog-MS)- defeated (twice)
• Harry Teague (Blue Dog-NM)- defeated

An intern or some other novice at Politico, Jennifer Haberkorn, tried covering this yesterday from the perspective of Beltway conventional wisdom that all these conservative Democrats lost their seats despite voting against the Affordable Care Act instead of because they voted against it. That's what Politico is all about: Beltway conventional wisdom, more often than not, wrong conventional wisdom. "Even those who opposed the law had trouble surviving the highly partisan atmosphere it helped to create," she marveled, not bothering to check the inordinately large drop off rates among voters in deep blue precincts. These people didn't switch to the GOP; they just didn't come out to vote for fake Democrats, many of whom had been recruited by Rahm Emanuel in 2006 and had amassed horrifying conservative records.
And while she was wrong on the overall gist of the story, she also made a hash out of the specifics. Mayabe she was only 10 or 11 in 2010 but Stephen Lynch did not vote against the Affordable Care Act "from the left." Democratic primary voters knew that in 2013 when the handed Ed Markey a stunning 57-43% victory of the conservative Lynch.

This is the garbage Steve Israel will spend at least $2 million on this year, money he tricks donors to contribute to the DCCC thinking they are supporting Democrats with their values:

Don't Minnesota Voters Deserve A Choice? Joe Perske Is NOT A Choice... In Fact, He's Anti-Choice

Hard to imagine, but MN-06 is likely to wind up with someone WORSE than Bachmann!

Drowning in scandal and extremism-- and facing a rematch with Jim Graves, the Democrat who nearly beat her last year-- Bachmann was uncharacteristically wise to announce her retirement from Congress. The Republicans are finding some other lunatic-- probably right-wing lobbyist Tom Emmer-- to represent Minnesota's 6th CD. Although the DCCC ignored Graves last year, they were as stunned by his success as Bachmann was and they promised to help him next year. Not counting outside money, Bachmann spent $11,946,232 on her reelection campaign, an incredible $66.65 for every vote. Graves spent $2,279,384 or $13.03 per vote. She beat him 180,131 to 175,923 and of the 8 counties that make up the district, he beat her in Benton and Stearns and tied her in Anoka and Washington.

Tom Emmer, who was defeated in his run for governor last year, is as extremist in his politics as Bachmann. He espouses the Confederate nullification doctrine, doesn't think corporations should pay any taxes at all, opposes a minimum wage and decided to make his gubernatorial run a jihad against waiters and waitresses. Of course he's a loud homophobic bigot, anti-Choice, actually in favor of school bullying and is a serial drunk driver who keeps trying to make drunk driving a less serious crime. The man is sick-- and that helps explain why he lost his bid for the governorship, despite being heavily financed to the tune of several million dollars by crooked corporations like Best Buy and Target.

Once Bachmann pulled out of the race, the DCCC's interest in helping Graves instantly evaporated and he withdrew as well. Although there's a possibility of an actual Democrat jumping in, it looks like the worst of all options, Sartell's conservative first-term mayor, Joe Perske, will be the Democratic candidate. There's no reason for any progressive to consider voting for him, regardless of how terrible Emmer is.

Perske acknowledged he’s "not an articulate politician" but says that might not be a problem for many 6th District voters.

"I change my own oil. I cut my own coupons. I don’t know how many congressmen do that," Perske said. "I represent the working class of Central Minnesota."

Perske says he considers himself a "Blue Dog," or centrist, Democrat because he says he’s against abortion rights and supports Second Amendment rights. Still, he says he’s not a Republican because they aren’t offering solutions to create livable wage jobs or improve education or health care access.

Perske can't win. You need an actual Democrat to beat a Republican, not an apologetic semi-Republican. Good time to watch this Grayson video about what a real Democrat is:




UPDATE: May 4

It took 4 votes at the convention, but Perske won the DFL endorsement, which means, in effect, the district will stay in Republican hands for at least another two years, probably much longer.

Patrick Murphy-- Is He The Worst Freshman Democrat? Unlikely He'll Be The Worst Sophomore

Technically, Patrick Murphy is a Democrat. He switched his registration from "Republican" just before challenging much-hated Tea Party target Allen West in 2012. A son of great wealth and privilege, Murphy was, of course, a lifelong Republican. Since getting into the House he's voted with Republicans on crucial roll calls more frequently than with Democrats. As a member of the House Financial Services Committee, he's sold out 100% to the Wall Street banksters and works consistently to help the Republicans seduce weak-minded and cowardly New Dems into joining them in dismantling the Dodd-Frank Wall Street reforms. The Democratic freshmen voting more frequently with the GOP than with their own party are:

• Patrick Murphy (New Dem-FL)
• Kyrsten Sinema (New Dem-AZ)
• Raul Ruiz (CA)
• Pete Gallego (Blue Dog-TX)
• Ann Kirkpatrick (AZ)
• Sean Patrick Maloney (New Dem-NY)

Florida Republicans see Murphy as weak and their easiest target in the state. He's also one of the easiest targets in the whole country, primarily because no progressive can vote for him and even those who held their noses to get rid of Allen West, won't be backing Murphy again this year. (He can count on a couple million dollars from Steve Israel, who encourages his atrocious voting pattern. Israel falls asleep every night repeating his mantra: "burn the base.")

It's not clear which Republican will be running against him-- so many plausible candidates want to try-- but Murphy had some especially bad news this week, when former state Rep. Carl Domino announced he's running. Domino, who had a net worth north of $20 million, was the richest man in the Florida legislature when he was serving there. Murphy's district has a PVI that is R+3 and Romney beat Obama there 52-48%. And Domino is famous for winning in blue districts. His last victory, also in an off-year, was in a D+5 district. No wonder Murphy sent out over a dozen desperate, substanceless e-mails begging for money over the weekend! George Bennett at the Palm Beach Post explained the lay of the land pretty well on Monday:

After months of waters-testing, former Republican state Rep. Carl Domino of Jupiter said today he’s definitely running for the Palm Beach-Treasure Coast congressional seat held by freshman Rep. Patrick Murphy, D-Jupiter.

Murphy is a top GOP target because he narrowly defeated Republican Rep. Allen West in 2012 and his district is one of only nine in the U.S. that chose a Democratic House member while voting for Mitt Romney last year.

Domino said he’ll file papers this week. He’ll join announced Republican candidates Ellen Andel (the vice mayor of Juno Beach) and Alan Schlesinger (a former GOP Senate nominee in Connecticut) in what could become a crowded GOP race.

Other Republicans who have shown interest in running include former state House Majority Leader Adam Hasner, St. Lucie County Commissioner Tod Mowery, state Rep. Gayle Harrell, former Tequesta councilman Calvin Turnquest and Martin County businessman Gary Uber.

Domino was elected four times to the state House, serving from 2002 to 2010. He also lost state House primaries in 2000 and 2012 and a bitter GOP Senate primary in 2010.

The National Republican Congressional Committee’s top recruiter has estimated that challenging Murphy will cost between $3 million and $5 million. Domino listed his net worth at $24.3 million in 2011 and poured more than $1.3 million of his own money into his four winning and three losing campaigns.

Something tells me Murphy's buddies on Wall Street and his pals at Big Oil aren't going to step up and save his ass. He'll be bothering the Democrats he's betrayed for money from now 'til election day.

Two More Slimy Self-Serving Conservatives Headed From Congress To K Street

Earlier in the week many of his were chuckling in resignation when it was announced that Indiana corporate shill and reflexive reactionary Evan Bayh-- also well as paid Fox contributor-- is going to work for a long-time fascist organization as a lobbyist.

Not long after announcing his plans to retire in 2010, then-Sen. Evan Bayh (D-Ind.) offered this bit of commentary on why he'd opted to leave Congress after two terms in office: "I want to be engaged in an honorable line of work." It was taken as a biting critique of the increasingly polarized and dysfunctional Senate, and a hint that Bayh's post-Senate plans might include a quiet career in academia, away from politics.

Now Bayh is eating his words. As iWatch News' Peter Stone reports, Bayh has signed on with one of the most corporate-friendly, anti-environment shops in all of Washington, DC: the US Chamber of Commerce. According to an internal memo penned by Chamber president Tom Donohue, Bayh, along with former Bush White House chief of staff Andy Card, are now part of the Chamber's anti-regulation messaging team, doing "speeches, events, and media appearances at local venues."

The Chamber's hiring of Bayh, a big name in Washington circles, will only help its efforts to delay or kill new regulatory legislation in Congress. Indeed, Donohue's memo touts how the Chamber has filed legal briefs to challenge the validity of President Obama's health care reform bill; successfully delayed a new Securities and Exchange Commission rule on giving shareholders a say on corporate directors; unveiled plans to undermine the clout of the fledgling Consumer Financial Protection Bureau; and delayed a rule forcing companies to disclose when they use conflict minerals from the Congo in their products. Bayh and Card, the memo says, will help the Chamber push this pro-corporate agenda in Washington and beyond.

But just as we were hoping Bayh's revolving door would hit him in the butt on the way out, news broke that an even worse example of a right-wing Democrat would soon be scurrying from Capitol Hill to K Street. This year-- as almost every year-- spoiled child of privilege and scummy dishonorable Blue Dog Dan Boren was the Democrat who voted most frequently with the Republicans on key substantive issues before the House. His ProgressivePunch Crucial Votes score for the current session is a dismal 17.43, not just the worst for any Democrat, but worse than 16 Republicans. Boehner and Cantor have been able to count on his support as much as George Bush always did. The Democratic caucus will be infinitely better off without him, even if fellow Blue Dog Brad Carson, the district's former congressman, wins the seat.

With Boren gone the once-mighty Blue Dog caucus of rightists and racists will have been cut down from 54 to 23. That's 23 too many. As Politico reported, former Tennessee Rep. John Tanner, a leading conservative Democrat who helped found the coalition in 1995, acknowledged that the Blue Dog wing is, for the time being at least, struggling for survival.

“It ought to concern us from the standpoint that we need to put aside strongly held philosophies,” said Tanner, who retired last year.

Former North Dakota Rep. Earl Pomeroy, a Blue Dog who lost his seat last November, put it more directly: “I think you could say this was the most disastrous House election that Democrats ever had, and those who paid the highest price were those in swing districts and those who were Blue Dogs.”

While Boren didn’t announce his plans, many in the growing ranks of former Blue Dogs have beaten a path to the lucrative environs of K Street, where they aren’t regularly berated by progressives who resent their departures from party orthodoxy or Republicans insisting they are tools of a liberal national party. In just the past few months alone, former South Dakota Rep. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin, former Tennessee Rep. Bart Gordon, Pomeroy and Tanner are among those who have taken the lobbying path.

I was on the phone with a senior progressive Democrat when the news of Boren's retirement hit the transom. I asked her if she had heard the news about Boren. And she shot back, "Did he finally make if official and switch parties?" I told her he was retiring and she asked me if I knew he was related to Paul Ryan by marriage. Boren, who's on the Board of Directors of the NRA, didn't endorse Obama in 2008 and voted against healthcare reform and was always strictly anti-Choice.

Last November Blue America helped defeat the only Democrat with a worse voting record than Boren: Bobby Bright, an Alabama Blue Dog. This year our ActBlue page, Send The Democrats A Message They Can Understand is assisting progressives who fighting for nominations against Blue Dogs and other conservative Democrats. We have three on our list so far and if you'd like to help them in their struggle we'd be most appreciative.

So What's Wrong With Ed Case? Is He Really Worse Than Joe Lieberman? Worse Than Tom DeLay?

Thursday, when Hawaii's stellar progressive congresswoman, Mazie Hirono, announced her intention to run for the seat being vacated by her friend and ally Daniel Akaka, we dashed off a quick post that detailed some of the specifics on Ed Case's long rap sheet of corporate shillery and conservative complicity. When he was in Congress his career was distinguished by two characteristics-- he was the closest thing the Democratic caucus had to a conservative Republican and he was the laziest Member of Congress with the worst attendance record.

The post pointed to his support for Republican and corporate initiatives like job-killing trade legislation and to special interests legislation like abolishing the estate tax for the super-rich, making it easier for banksters to rip off consumers, screwing over working families on pensions and the never-ending Republican proposals to shift the tax burden to the middle class. He generally voted with the most reactionary Democrats when they joined the GOP to stifle reform and, we tried to make the point that anyone who likes Chamber of Commerce pawns and Patriot Act-type Dems like Dan Boren (Blue Dog-OK) and Joe Donnelly (Blue Dog-IN) will be perfectly happy with Ed Case-- especially if xenophobia and war-mongering and making sure that victims of big corporations have no recourse to the courts are on the menu.

But in our rush to put up a place to donate to Mazie's campaign, we left off one of the most important factors in Case's long and shameful record-- his disregard for the rights of women when it came to choice and his siding with right-wing extremist against women. Back in 2005 when Case was an astoundingly bad congressman, his Republican allies tried to defund Planned Parenthood by cutting Title X family planning out of the budget-- just as they've done this year. This year Mazie Hirono strenuously opposed that, of course. Back in 2005 an amendment by far right sociopath Jeb Hensarling (R-TX) targeted NPR, PBS, the National Endowment for the Arts, and Title X family planning all in one shot. Only one Democrat crossed the aisle to vote for the most extreme piece of legislation of that session... Ed Case. Not even a majority of Republicans were that extreme (in those days). 197 Democrats and 122 Republicans voted NO and it failed 102-320. But Case voted YES, something even right-wing extremists like Darrell Issa, Steve Pearce, Denny Rehberg, Devin Nunes, John Culberson, Buck McKeon and Jerry Lewis, all of whom voted for essentially the same crap this year, were unwilling to do then. Even Tom DeLay and Henry Hyde found it too extreme and voted against it!

Case's backers in Hawaii try to portray him as socially moderate, rather than a reactionary extremist. But he's never explained to the women of Hawaii why he voted against funding for Planned Parenthood. There's no reason he should even be running as a Democrat. The guy has a clearly Republican voting record and it would be nothing short of catastrophic to reward his perfidy with a Senate seat. A Senator Case would make Ben Nelson and Joe Manchin look liberal. Let's help make sure Mazie replaces Dan Akaka and not the right-winger who tried to beat Akaka in a primary 5 years ago. Please consider contributing to Mazie's campaign here through ActBlue. Sending Ed Case to the Senate is tantamount to sending a conservative Republican to the Senate.

Can The Democrats Find A Worse Candidate Than Joe Manchin Or Ben Nelson? Try Joe Donnelly

This year there have been a baker's dozen Democrats who have consistently voted with Boehner and Cantor on almost every big issue. Dan Boren is, by far, the worst-- with a ProgressivePunch score of 15.15, worse than 2 dozen Republicans. The next most reactionary Democrats, all Blue Dogs of course, are Mike Ross (AR), Jim Costa (CA), Jason Altmire (PA), Collin Peterson (MN), Henry Cuellar (TX), Jim Matheson (UT), John Barrow (GA), Ben Chandler (KY), Dennis Cardoza (CA), Tim Holden (PA), Mike McIntyre (NC) and Joe Donnelly (IN). When you take the district's partisan tilt into consideration, though, Donnelly, who represents a Democratic-leaning district (his constituents went for Obama over McCain 54-45%) drops to the very bottom of the pile. His -42.93 score trumps Boren's negative 40.89. So who has the Democratic Party decided to move up the Beltway political ladder? Yes, virulently anti-Choice, antigay, pro-corporate Joe Donnelly. A.P. reported yesterday that Donnelly will announce a run for Lugar's Senate seat today.

Two Democrats with firsthand knowledge of Donnelly's plans told The Associated Press that the congressman is entering the race because he believes that Lugar will lose a Republican primary offering him a path to the Senate. Lugar is facing a strong challenge from his right, State Treasurer Richard Mourdock.

The Democrats spoke on the condition of anonymity because they did not want to pre-empt Monday's announcement.

By entering the race, Donnelly-- who also weighed a run for governor-- gives national Democrats a recruiting victory. No other Democrats have entered the race. Donnelly's supporters believe he can clear the Democratic primary field.

A recruiting victory? Don't Democrats ever learn? Because of conservative corporate shills like Donnelly, Democrats and left-leaning independents didn't bother turning out in the 2010 midterms. "There is no difference between the two parties" may not be true where you're from, but it is true in Donnelly's case. And if Lugar does win renomination, a case could be made that he would actually be a better choice than Donnelly!

Yesterday, coincidentally, I was trying to find the worst corporate shills in the Democratic House delegation. I decided to see how many who have voted against the DISCLOSE Act (H.R. 5175) had also voted for the Republican effort to end voluntary public funding for presidential elections (H.R 359). Only 4 Democrats had voted the corporate line on both, Donnelly being one. But it's hard to find any issue that distinguishes the two parties where Donnelly comes across unambiguously as a Democrat. Even if you forgive him for being fanatically anti-Choice (I don't)-- he is also fanatically anti-contraception, voting against Planned Parenthood all three times the GOP tried to kill it since 2007. And if you, for whatever reason, think marriage equality is too radical for Indiana, what about Don't Ask Don't Tell? A clear and overwhelming majority of Americans agreed with the Democrats-- and the Pentagon-- that that bigoted anti-gay rule was outdated and dysfunctional. But not Donnelly. He was one of only 26 Democrats who fellow Blue Dog Patrick Murphy couldn't persuade that it was time to give up on DADT. Even 5 Republicans voted to end the discredited policy. It passed 234-194 with Joe Donnelly once again on the wrong side of history. It's absolutely perverse for the DSCC to even consider recruiting a slouch like Donnelly who will do nothing but confuse voters about which party stands with working families and which party stands with Big Business. In fact just last week, the GOP brought up 3 bills rewarding Big Oil-- and Donnelly was one of the few Democrats to vote with the Republicans all three times. He was also one of the few Democrats who ran TV ads attacking Nancy Pelosi and Democratic energy and immigration policies in last year's midterms. If you think Ben Nelson and Joe Manchin and Blanche Lincoln are good Democrats, you'll love Joe Donnelly in the U.S. Senate as well.

Dan Boren-- Leading Democrats Astray For Boehner

Last year Alabama Blue Dog Bobby Bright had the worst voting record of any Democrat in the House-- voting far more frequently with the GOP than with the Democrats on issues with partisan divisions. Blue America reminded his Democratic constituents of some of his votes against their interests and his margin in the blue areas of his district fell down and he was defeated. His replacement as the worst Democrat in the House is someone never far from that appellation anyway, Oklahoma corporate whore, Dan Boren.

According to ProgressivePunch's algorithm, Boren was worse than just the worst Democrat. His abysmal 15.87 score-- meaning he's voted with the GOP over 84% of the time-- is worse than two dozen Republicans! Boehner and Cantor have been able to count on Boren for nearly every important vote in the House. He's more reliable for them than extremist teabaggers Tom McClintock (R-CA) and Justin Amash (R-MI) and worse than rubber stamp corporate shills like Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA), John Campbell (R-CA), Tom Petri (R-WI), Connie Mack (R-FL) and Steven LaTourette (R-OH). He has the exact same voting score as Dean Heller (R-NV), the newly appointed Republican Senator from Nevada. That's how much the GOP approves of Boren's voting score!

And, of course, he goes beyond just the voting when it comes to showing fealty to all the extremist positions embraced by the GOP. He's far to the right-- across the board-- of any other Blue Dog. In fact Boren, a poster boy for the NRA wrote one of the worst of the gun-loon bills of the year. Is was so extreme that there were even a couple of Republicans who couldn't vote for it!

Boren's amendment passed the House 277-149, with the support of a disgraceful 41 Democrats, mostly Blue Dogs but also some cowardly types from "gun states." Boren's bill-- which was eventually killed in behind the scenes congressional negotiations (a clue that even the GOP leadership though Boren's extremist was too dangerous and deranged-- had nothing to due with "gun states" though. His intention was to prevent the ATF from regulating the deadly, if not catastrophic, firearm sales along the Mexico border. Specifically, what Boren was proposing was to stop ATF from tracking bulk sales of assault weapons headed to Mexico.

But sometime before the final deal was announced on Friday night, lawmakers stripped the rider from the bill. The move came after concerned lawmakers and even Mexico's Ambassador to the United States lobbied congressional leadership and the White House to strip the language from the bill.

"ATF is already chronically underfunded and has been without a confirmed director since 2006 as a result of inaction by past sessions of Congress," New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, a co-chair of the coalition Mayors Against Illegal Guns, said in a statement. "We welcome this sign that leaders in Washington may be ready to step up and help law enforcement save lives."

Instead of railing against the regular cast of characters who can always be counted on to support these kinds of lunatic pieces of legislation-- and did-- like slimy Blue Dogs John Barrow (GA), Heath Shuler (NC), Mike Ross (AR), Jim Cooper (TN), Mike McIntyre (NC), Joe Donnelly (IN) and Jim Matheson (UT), let's look at some House Democrats being pushed forward towards higher office who also joined Boren in his efforts-- Shelley Berkley, the Democratic nominee for the Nevada Senate seat and Martin Heinrich, the favorite to get the Democratic nomination for the open Senate seat in New Mexico. When the DSCC approaches you for support for these two, be sure you understand what you're voting for-- not just people willing to stand up for Second Amendment gun ownership rights-- important to their constituents-- but people without the moral backbone to oppose the bloody drug war along the Mexican border. or do you think voters in New Mexico and Nevada would be outraged if Mexican drug lords couldn't be arsenals of assault weapons here?

It isn't just those crazy right-wing Republicans dragging the country to the far right

by Ken

As Howie has been pointing out, of course there are alternatives to the right-wing-gone-wild program for budget cuts that allow those least able to afford them to do the most sharing in this "shared sacrifice" we're hearing so much about. (ThinkProgress's ProgressReport has a customarily excellent roundup today on "The Progressive Path to Deficit Reduction.")

There's a general feeling that the president's budget speech wasn't as bad as it might have been -- or as a lot of people expected. Which doesn't mean it's okay, or more important, that it's anywhere near where the "compromise" process will wind up. As Paul Krugman pointed out on his blog, if this is the "extreme" position on the side of sanity, then halfway between it and the position staked out by the likes of Paul "Die, Granny, Die" Ryan is going to be, well, way out there.

I do have a certain sympathy with what the president is up against in the hard-core right-wing opposition, as reflected in a headline link I noticed on the Washington Post e-newsletter after the speech, in which some genius was remonstrating that the president's speech reflected "a partisan tone." Um, I'm speechless. I'll bet all those nonpartisan Teabaggers are in shock.

Still, the evidence remains unmistakable that it's far from just the loons of the Republican Right driving this ideological lurch, which -- let us say it once again -- has nothing to do with budget crises, except insofar as the present situation provides cover for all sorts of right-wing onslaughts that have been on the crazyfolks' wish list for ages. Not just in the U.S. House but in statehouses all over the country where Republicans used the combination of economic terror and the absence of any meaningful Democratic commitment to solutions to take or retake control.

However, a scare that materialized suddenly in Illinois turned out not to be a Republican but a Democratic shenanigan, averted by the narrowest of margins. In how many other cases will we not be so lucky? Jen Sabella reports on HuffPost:

Anti-Gay Adoption Bill Shot Down In Illinois Senate Committee

A bill that would have allowed religious organizationsto deny gay couples adoption and foster care services was voted down in Senate committee Wednesday.

The legislation, which was sponsored by Democratic Sen. David Koehler, would have amended the state's recently passed civil unions law and allowed religious child welfare agencies to "decline an adoption or foster family home application" to a couple in a civil union if "if acceptance of that application would constitute a violation of the organization's sincerely held religious beliefs."

The Senate Executive Committee voted down the bill 7 to 6, with 1 abstention, and it is now dead.

"This is a huge victory for the LGBTQ community and families across Illinois," said Anthony Martinez, Executive Director of the Civil Rights Agenda, in a statement Wednesday. "This is also a huge win for the tens of thousands of children that are in the adoption and foster system and need loving families."

Martinez worked to mobilize opponents of the measure earlier this week. The American Civil Liberties Union, Family Equality Council and the Log Cabin Republicans all voiced their opposition to the measure Tuesday. One main issue with the legislation was whether religious agencies would be breaking anti-discrimination laws by rejecting openly gay prospective parents while taking public funds for adoption and foster care services.

"This proposal would deny loving homes for many children who are in foster care or who are awaiting placement in foster homes," Jennifer Chrisler, Executive Director of the Family Equality Council, said in a statement. "Given the need for adoptive parents in the state of Illinois there is no justification in allowing agencies using public funding to facilitate adoptions to discriminate."

Martinez told HuffPost Chicago Tuesday that his organization was concerned about the bill passing due to its sponsors. Koehler is a respected and usually progressive senator and his co-sponsor Sen. William Haine is a moderate Democrat. He said he feared the men would have the support they needed to pass SB 1123.

#

Two Democratic Women Who Lost In November Are Running Again: Ann Kuster (NH) And Ann Kirkpatrick (AZ)

Perhaps you'll recall that last year Blue America endorsed Ann McLane Kuster in a fierce primary battle against a Joe Lieberman type conservative in the New Hampshire primary for the seat that had opened up when Paul Hodes vacated the seat to run for the Senate. Ann trounced her cash-rich Establishment-backed opponent 71-29%. We also endorsed her in the general election against Republican corporate shill and rubber stamp Charlie base-- whose campaign was partially financed by Beijing-- but she lost by a heartbreaking 3,000 votes. Bass has been as awful a congressman as we expected, consistently voting against the interests of his own constituents and in favor of corporate demands and the right-wing ideological agenda. We expect to endorse Ann again when she officially throws her hat into the ring.

Not so with another Democratic Party candidate across the country in Arizona, also an Ann. This one, Ann Kirkpatrick, lost her seat to teabag extremist Paul Gosar in November after running up one of the most worst voting records of any Democrat in Congress. But she wants the seat back.

"It's clear to me, now that Paul Gosar has a record, that he is toeing the party line rather than serving the district," she said. "The real key for me is the number of people who I've been hearing from in the district-- and this is Democrats, independents, Republicans and even folks who are actively involved in the 'tea party'-- that they feel he is deeply out-of-touch with the district."

Kirkpatrick said she hopes the 2012 political climate will be more hospitable to her candidacy because it is a presidential year and likely will have a bigger turnout.

When Kirkpatrick first ran in 2008 for the sprawling open seat that takes up most of the state she took 56%-- 155,791 votes (as opposed to 109,924 for his GOP opponent). She won 6 of the district's 8 counties with the biggest, Yavapai, being a virtual tie-- 45,014 for her and 45,487 for her opponent). Last year, her confusing voting record-- she stuck with the Republicans whenever it mattered most-- depressed Democratic turnout and the results were astonishing. Gosar won even more GOP votes than Hay, the character she first ran against-- 112,816 but over 50,000 of her initial supporters evaporated. She only managed to get 99,233 votes, a pathetic result of a pathetic 2 years in Congress. She only won 3 counties of the 8-- and was trounced by Gosar 47,449- 27,179 in Yavapai.

There is no path to victory for Kirkpatrick in Arizona. The Democratic activists and the base hate her and all the corporate cash the DCCC will dump into the district will be wasted. This is the repulsive hallmark of Steve Israel as DCCC chair. The Democrats would be better off finding a real Democrat who represents the interests of working families in one of the nation's poorest districts rather than some corporate shill whose one claim to fame is that she isn't as bad as the teabagger in office. Ann Kirkpatrick is a loser and Steve Israel is a loser for recruiting her again and a loser for falling back on a tired, self-defeating formula that encompasses his own conservative worldview. At least the Sierra Club, which endorsed her in 2008, is unlikely to make the same mistake twice.

Between a vote to swap federal lands to allow mining near Superior, and the vote against the climate bill, the Sierra Club is not pleased... "Her district will feel the effects of climate change significantly, especially in the greater Grand Canyon area," said Grand Canyon Chapter Director Sandy Bahr. "Reduced flows in our rivers and streams is only one of many issues. There is a lot of evidence to suggest that the higher temperatures will result in even more dead trees and more significant forest fires." 

..."There are certainly a lot of progressive Democrats who are disappointed by her votes at this point," said Democrat Avtar Khalsa. But those sentiments appear to stop somewhere near the city limits, with farther-flung Democrats more supportive. 

 ..."I basically think that Ann Kirkpatrick should return to her Republican roots," said Democrat Debbie Leavitt, referencing Kirkpatrick's childhood in a home that was politically divided. "I don't think she should be allowed to continue pretending to be a Democrat." 
 
Others spoke on parallel tracks, including one of her more generous donors in Flagstaff. 
 
"I am very disappointed in her promise versus performance on environmental issues," said William Putnam of Lowell Observatory. 

Perhaps some local Democrats didn't fully understand who they were electing, said city councilwoman Karla Brewster. 
 
"The people I've talked to are angry ... and believed she would be more liberal than she has been voting," Brewster said. "In talking to Ann myself, I've believed she would be more moderate." 
 
...Democrat Bill Breed supported Kirkpatrick and congressional candidate Howard Shanker last year, before siding with Shanker. 
 
"She doesn't vote like a Democrat," he said of Kirkpatrick.

UPDATE: And A Third

This time it's anti-Choice fanatic and arch-conservative Kathy Dahlkemper, who lost last November after two pathetic years in office, who wants to try to reclaim her old seat representing the Erie area (PA-3). In 2008 she had narrowly edged out incumbent Phil English 146,846 (51%) to 139,757 (49%) with a big win in Erie County (71,332 votes, 57%), a close win in Mercer and losses Butler and the 4 smaller counties. Last November, after an excruciating 2 years of aisle-crossing and trying to please Republican voters while screwing Democrats and having given her own base no real reason to bother coming to the polls, she lost the seat to a rich car salesman, teabagger Mike Kelly 111,909 (56%) to 88,924 (44%). Over 60,000 of her voters sat it out, while GOP drop off from the presidential year was less than half that. Her vote in Erie County went down by over 30,000 and she lost Mercer and every other county. Steve Israel and the DCCC may think recruited Dahlkemper ticks off some boxes but she has no path to victory-- short of the Republican legislature and Republican district redrawing (enlarging) the district to make it more Democratic. That's not going to happen.

"Is this the best way for me to continue to serve the community that I love so much? I'm trying to make the best decision for me and my (former) constituents,'' she said.

Dahlkemper, 53, said it's difficult to say when she will decide. But she said she couldn't wait too long because of the need to raise campaign funds and get her message out.

She announced in October 2007 when she ran in the 2008 election cycle. "Waiting until fall would put me or anyone else at a great disadvantage,'' she said.

Dahlkemper confirmed that she's talked to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee about a possible run.

Bill Cole, the Erie County Democratic Party chairman, said he also asked Dahlkemper in a recent phone conversation about her future political plans.

"Though she has not made a firm commitment to running, she was going to do some exploratory activities to see whether she'd run again-- kind of test the waters, to see how people felt,'' Cole said.

...The political environment could be better for a Democratic congressional candidate in 2012 than it was in 2010 because President Barack Obama will be seeking re-election, said Robert Speel, associate political-science professor at Penn State Behrend.

That could boost voter turnout among Democrats and help a Dahlkemper candidacy, he said.

"We'll have to see President Obama's popularity at the time of next year's election, but right now, I would say she probably would have a better chance of winning next year than she had last year,'' he said.

Dahlkemper said she thinks running during a presidential year would help.

"Hopefully, the Democrats will be more engaged and enthused than they were in the 2010 election," she said. "I think that they are already showing signs of that.''

Dahlkemper offers pretty much the same weak tea to Democratic voters that Republicans do: "We're not as bad as they are." Obama nearly tied McCain in the 3rd district in 2008-- but he still lost. And that was when there was Hope and Change in the wind. Now all there is is an alternative to a pack of mad dogs running the GOP.