AZ-01-- Wenona Benally Baldenegro Vs... Garbage

Tomorrow is primary day in Arizona. I want to spend a little time talking about the race for the district the Democrats have the clearest shot of turning blue-- AZ-01. One of the largest in America by square miles, this is basically the one district in the state that doesn't have voters from Phoenix of Tucson dominating its politics. In 2008, Republican incumbent Rick Renzi was driven out of Congress in a series of scandals and, in a year that saw the whole country revolted by Republican corruption, a middle of the road Democrat Ann Kirkpatrick, beat a far right Republican, Sydney Hay, 155,791 (56%) to 109,924 (40%)-- a higher percentage not just than Obama but by favorite son, John McCain! But she was so disappointing to Democrats and so utterly worthless in Congress that she was immediately defeated by Republican Paul Gosar in 2010, part of the Great Blue Dog Apocalypse-- 112,816 (50%) to 99,233 (44%). Democrats didn't go over and vote for Gosar; they just couldn't bring themselves to vote for a conservative nothing like Kirkpatrick. So along comes 2012 and Steve Israel immediately re-recruits Kirkpatrick to run again in a redistricted-- and far bluer-- AZ-01. In fact, it's so much bluer, that Gosar decamped for AZ-04, a low-info red hellhole, where his reactionary, anti-working family agenda will be better appreciated. And that brings us to tomorrow's primary for the Democratic nomination to represent AZ-01.

There's a really good candidate running, Wenona Baldenegro. But she's very progressive. And she's very independent minded. And she's not interested in playing footsie with corporate lobbyists or Wall Street banksters. She is, in fact, exactly what Steve Israel doesn't want in the House Democratic caucus. So he launched a vicious campaign to undermine her and boost the bland, robotic Kirkpatrick. Israel would rather lose to a Republican than win with a progressive like Wenona. This is an e-mail I got from a friend in Arizona that came from Wenona's campaign. After studying the DCCC intensely since 2005, the e-mail sounds spot on, although I don't think the DCCC's intentions are as much about racism as they are about careerism and corruption-- the only things that motivate hacks like Hoyer, Israel, Wasserman-Schultz and Crowley, the powers there. (Most of the accusations of racism, though are directed towards the Pima County and Arizona state Democratic Party. I have no first-hand knowledge of either but the case below is very persuasive and fits the picture well.)

This essay addresses a civil-rights issue that Mexican Americans and other communities of color have had to deal with for generations: the Democratic Party’s thinking that it owns us and taking our support for granted… applying a double standard to candidates of color… working against our interests even as it demands and expects our support, etc.

The racial-ethnic overtones of the Democratic Party’s attitude are particularly egregious in its actions regarding Wenona Benally Baldenegro’s historic congressional candidacy.

[While the focus here is on the Democratic Party’s actions regarding Wenona Benally Baldenegro, those actions can be generalized to other candidates of color, to other communities.]

Superbly qualified, Wenona is a Harvard-educated attorney who has extensive political and policy development experience and who is energizing constituencies-- Native Americans, youth, Latinos, women, etc.-- essential to the electoral success of the Democratic Party.

The only Native American congressional candidate in the country, Wenona, when elected, will be the first Native American woman in the history of the U.S. to serve in Congress and the first Native American, man or woman, from Arizona elected to Congress.

Yet, the Democratic Party-- at the Pima County, state, and national levels-- which, as a matter of policy and practice is not supposed to support one candidate over another in contested Primaries, is going all out to derail Wenona Benally Baldenegro’s candidacy and to defeat her.

Here’s what’s going on, re: Wenona’s Congressional District 1 candidacy:

Officials and representatives of the Pima County and Arizona Democratic Party are…

1. Falsely representing Wenona’s opponent as an incumbent to justify undermining Wenona’s campaign.

2. Calling Wenona supporters and pressuring them to withdraw their support of Wenona.

3. Sponsoring fundraisers for Wenona’s Primary race opponent.

The Party claims to be opposed, on principle, to the Payday Loan industry and to ALEC (American Legislative Exchange Council, the right wing group funded by the Koch brothers), yet it is…

4. Openly and enthusiastically supporting a white candidate-- Wenona’s opponent-- whose campaign is funded by Payday Loan and ALEC lobbyists even as they are…

5. Undermining the campaign of a Native American candidate, Wenona, who (a) has worked against Payday Loan predators and (b) does not accept any corporate or ALEC donations.

The Democratic Party’s anti-Native American/Mexican American campaign goes all the way to the national level, viz.:

1. The national Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Chairman, Steve Israel, hosted a fundraiser for Wenona’s opponent, Ann Kirkpatrick.

2. Democratic Party National Committee shill James Carville sent an e-mail imploring us “to help Ann Kirkpatrick” and fight “…the Koch boys who are trying to buy this election…”

Carville’s and the Democratic Party’s hypocrisy is staggering, given that Carville and Kirkpatrick are swimming in the same cesspool as “the Koch boys”-- i.e., Ann Kirkpatrick’s campaign is funded heavily by ALEC lobbyists! [This is discussed more fully below.]

The majority of rank-and-file Democrats are decent and principled people, and in an ideal world, they would be outraged about the Democratic Party’s actions and do something about it. But the Democratic Party is run by an elite clique who purposely keeps the rank-and-file Democrats in the dark about what they’re doing. What the Democratic Party does do is maintain a stable of sycophants, minions and hangers-on who parrot the tired “lesser of evils” line. In their perverted view, Democratic race-ethnic discrimination is qualitatively better than Republican race-ethnic discrimination. Applying these folks’ reasoning retroactively, our community should not have challenged the laws and policies that:

1. Mandated that Mexican American children attend segregated schools with inferior facilities… because, well, they at least got to go to school.

2. Allowed Mexican American children to swim in public pools only one day a week, the day before the pool was cleaned… because, well, they at least got to swim…Etc., etc.

What prompted this essay?

Recent televised comments by the Chair of the Pima County Democratic Party brought to mind the issues discussed here, viz.:

Here’s the verbatim transcript of the July 6, 2012, (PBS program) “Political Roundtable” dialogue between program host Jim Nintzel and Jeff Rogers-- speaking in his official capacity as Chairman of the Pima County Democratic Party:

Start at Minute 21:54:

Jim Nintzel: Uh… Jeff, you mentioned earlier the Primary in this race, CD1 race. You’ve already got complaints from Wendy (sic) Benally Baldenegro that the Democrats aren’t playing fair in this race.

Jeff Rogers: Right. Well, I… I… I think that… that… that when we have an incumbent… uh, something that’s almost like a pseudo incumbent, like Ann Kirkpatrick, the Party has kind of rallied around her… uh… because she just… she just… she’s probably the best chance we have to win that race.

And I really do like Wenona a lot, and I have a lot of respect for her and consider her a rising star, but I just don’t think that this is her year. At some other point in time, I think… uh… she’ll present a wonderful… a wonderful new face to the party, but I just think that Ann Kirkpatrick has huge advantages, and so it’s… it’s hard to deny that, you know, everyone has rallied around Ann and her campaign. End at Minute 22:44

I. What part of “pseudo” do you people not understand? Kirkpatrick is a “pseudo incumbent” and therefore deserves the Party’s support? Jeff Rogers knows full well that the CD-1 seat is an open seat and has no incumbent and that Kirkpatrick is not an elected official and is not an incumbent of anything. “Pseudo” means “false,” “fake,” “not real.” In his zeal to deprive the Native American community a voice in Congress, Rogers turns “pseudo” on its head. [Not to mention that he obviously thinks we’re stupid and don’t know what “pseudo” means.]

II. WE’LL decide when the likes of you can run for office… Patronizingly (visualize Rogers patting Wenona on the head), Rogers asserts that (1) Wenona is a nice person and all, but that he and the Democratic Party have decided that “...this is just not her year” to run, and (2) he and the Democratic Party will determine when it’s her time to run. In essence, Rogers, playing God, is articulating the age-old mantra: We, your betters, will tell you people when you can run for office…in the meantime, be good little boys and girls and hang around the dinner table and there’ll be scraps for you after we eat.

III. So what if Kirkpatrick lost 68,000 votes from one election to another… to us she’s a winner! Rogers asserts that he and the Democratic Party support Kirkpatrick over Wenona because Kirkpatrick “…is the best chance we have to win that race.” But Rogers knows full well that in one of the-- if not THE-- worst and most embarrassing electoral defeats in Arizona history, 68,000 Democrats who voted in 2008 stayed home in 2010 and did not vote rather than vote for Kirkpatrick! (Arizona Daily Sun, 11/7/10)

Keep in mind that there was no organized “Do not vote…” campaign-- 68,000 Democratic voters individually and independently stayed home rather than go vote for Kirkpatrick. Incredibly[!], the Pima County Democratic Party and the Arizona Democratic Party would rather support a white candidate they know in their hearts will lose the CD-1 race rather than support a Native American woman who would most likely win that race.

IV. It’s “Payday Joe” we hate...We love “Payday Ann”…

A. In the last Tucson City Council election, the Pima County Democratic Party took the unprecedented action of not only endorsing one candidate over another in a contested City Council Primary race, it also invested $15,000 in a billboard campaign demonizing the hapless Joe Flores as “Payday Joe.” (As I understand it, either Joe Flores or his children operated a check-cashing and payday loan business.)

Jeff Rogers righteously expressed his and the Democratic Party’s abhorrence of the Payday Loan industry and anyone associated with that industry as justification for this first-ever action by the Pima County Democratic Party.

For sure, the Payday Loan industry is a vulture industry that preys on people’s misfortunes and makes hundreds of millions in profits off of the misfortune of its victims, destroys families, etc.
Methodist Bishop Minerva G. Carcano, Arizona Ecumenical Council president, described Payday lenders as “…thieves stealing from the most vulnerable.” (Tucson Citizen, 10/02/08) Carcano’s comment was made in the context of opposition to the 2008 Payday Loan industry-sponsored Proposition 200 in Arizona that would have allowed Payday lenders to charge 391% interest and to raid borrowers’ bank accounts.

B. But wait… Ann Kirkpatrick, whom Jeff Rogers and the Pima County Democratic Party and the Arizona Democratic Party enthusiastically support, is awash in payday loan money! The Payday Loan industry lobbyists who worked together on the aforementioned Prop 200, i.e., to foist Prop 200 on us, were [Republican] Jonathan Paton, [Democrat] Mario Diaz, and [Republican] Stan Barnes.

Federal Elections Commission (FEC) reports show that Mario E. Diaz, chief lobbyist for the predatory Payday Loan industry in Arizona, has made a series of substantial contributions-- $1,873 here, $2,300 there… I stopped counting at $8,746-- to Ann Kirkpatrick, the candidate Jeff Rogers, the Pima County Democratic Party, and the Arizona Democratic Party are actively supporting.

Mario Diaz, chief lobbyist for the predatory Payday Loan industry, also contributes tens of thousands of dollars to scores of Arizona and Pima County Democratic local, state, and federal candidates and incumbents, and… is a major contributor to the Arizona Democratic Party—$5,000 here, $2,000 there…I stopped counting at $25,810.

And then there’s Stan Barnes. The person consistently described in news reports as the “spokesman for the Payday Lending industry” in Arizona, (Republican) Stan Barnes, also contributed thousands of dollars to Kirkpatrick’s campaign and to the Arizona Democratic Party. [A relevant aside: Ann Kirkpatrick contributor Stan Barnes hosted fundraisers for Russell Pearce during the Recall Pearce campaign, even as Wenona Benally Baldenegro and her campaign staff traveled to Mesa, AZ, to gather Recall Pearce petition signatures, and on Nov. 8, 2011, Wenona and her staff canvassed neighborhoods in Mesa to get out the vote that recalled Russell Pearce.]

In contrast to Kirkpatrick, Wenona has no ties to the predatory Payday Loan industry and has not received contributions from anyone associated with that industry. In fact, Wenona, while working for the non-profit organization Arizona Natives Assets Coalition, was an advocate for people being exploited by Payday Lenders and conducted workshops for working and low-income families regarding how to avoid Payday lenders. Yet, Jeff Rogers and the Pima County Democratic Party and the Arizona Democratic Party are actively opposing Wenona Benally Baldenegro and supporting the candidate subsidized by Payday Loan Lobbyists Mario Diaz and Stan Barnes-- “Payday Ann.”

So, to recap: The Pima County Democratic Party’s and the Arizona Democratic Party’s position is: Association with the Payday Loan industry is vile and indecent EXCEPT if you’re a white Republican who opportunistically changed her registration to Democrat and receives massive contributions from Payday Loan lobbyists… in which case we’ll support you. [Dare we ask: Can we expect the Pima County Democratic Party to pony up $15,000 to put up “Support Payday Ann” billboards in the Pima County portion of CD-1?]

V. Rogers pretends to object to the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC). He recently reposted (with the comment: “So, what’s going on here?”) on his Facebook page a blog that criticized a Mexican American legislative candidate because a PAC that has ties to an organization associated with ALEC did a mailing in support of the candidate. Fair enough. ALEC is a right-wing organization funded by brothers Charles and David Koch. The Koch brothers and ALEC are the major funders of the Tea Party movement and develop legislation to, among other things, defund Planned Parenthood and disenfranchise minority voters. But wait…

Rogers and the Pima County Democratic Party and the Arizona Democratic Party enthusiastically support Ann Kirkpatrick who has received scores of contributions from ALEC members such as the Corrections Corporation of America (CCA) (which makes millions of dollars in profits from the Mexicans “rounded up” by America’s most racist Sheriff, Joe Arpaio), Arizona Public Service (APS), Brownstein, Hyatt, Farber, and Schreck, Pinnacle West Capital Corporation, the Salt River Project (SRP), and others.

So, to recap: The Pima County Democratic Party’s and the Arizona Democratic Party’s position is: Having a PAC that has ties to an organization associated with ALEC do a mailing in your support is vile and indecent if you are a Mexican American candidate… BUT if you’re a white Republican who opportunistically changed her registration to Democrat and receives many, many contributions from ALEC members…we’ll support you, especially if you’re running against a Native American lifelong Democrat who has no ties to ALEC.

[There are advantages to having media friends who cover politics: Jeff Rogers’ “Political Roundtables” pal, Jim Nintzel of the Tucson Weekly, also makes hay of the ALEC-associated PAC doing a mailer for a Mexican American candidate (which the candidate knew nothing about and basically disowns) and conveniently ignores the scores of ALEC-associated contributions Rogers’ candidate, Ann Kirkpatrick, has knowingly solicited and accepted.]

VI. Kirkpatrick is our pseudo incumbent who is in the pocket of the Payday Loan industry and depresses Democratic turnout and stands proudly with the Republicans and ALEC… During her single term in Congress (before 68,000 Democrats refused to come out to vote for her for a second term), Ann Kirkpatrick stood with the Republicans and ALEC…

1. Against the Latino community and fought the U.S. Department of Justice’s lawsuit against SB 1070, calling it a “sideshow” (on this Kirkpatrick stood proudly with Jan Brewer, Russell Pearce, and Joe Arpaio) and TWICE refused to vote for the DREAM Act.

2. Against unions regarding the Employee Free Choice Act, which speaks to the issue of the rights of workers to unionize.

3. Against Native Americans and unions by supporting the union-busting Rio Tinto corporation that is setting up a non-union mine operation, which will entail the destruction of sacred Apache land.

4. And turned her back on her environmentalist support base (the Sierra Club and others) by supporting the Rio Tinto mine, which, in addition to destroying Apache sacred sites, will do immense environmental damage.

5. And voted to support the tax cuts for the wealthy passed under President Bush.

6. And voted “Nay” on H.R. 1728, the Mortgage Reform and Anti-Predatory Lending Act of 2009.

7. And voted “Nay” on H.R. 4173, the Wall Street Accountability and Consumer Protection Act.
(Visualize Kirkpatrick’s Payday Loan Lobbyist donors looking over her shoulder to make sure she voted the “right” way on No. 6 and No. 7 above.)

8. And voted “Nay” on HR 1256, the FDA Oversight of Tobacco Products bill.

9. And voted “Nay” on H.R. 3269, the Corporate and Financial Institution Compensation Fairness Act of 2009.

10. And voted “Nay” on H.R. 2847, the Jobs for Main Street Act of 2009.

11. And…well, you get the picture.

And Kirkpatrick’s pattern of voting in lockstep with Republicans and ALEC is not something in the past. Just this month, the (Flagstaff) Arizona Daily Sun ran an article comparing the Democratic and Republican CD-1 candidates’ stands on various issues. Here’s what that article concluded:

“Out of 30 issues, Kirkpatrick wound up agreeing nearly as many times with Republicans Wade and Martin (11 votes each) as she did with Benally Baldenegro (12 votes).” (ArizonaDailySun.com, August 7, 2012)

So, to recap: The Pima County Democratic Party’s and the Arizona Democratic Party’s position is: We oppose Republicans EXCEPT if you’re a white Republican who opportunistically changed her registration to Democrat and votes consistently with Republicans and ALEC and are running against a highly qualified progressive Native American woman who is a lifelong Democrat and who is energizing several key Democratic constituencies…in which case we’ll support you.

IX. That backbone is there, people just need to find it… What the Democratic Party is doing is wrong. The Party’s sycophants, minions, and hangers-on defending the Democratic Party’ actions is wrong. Rank-and-file Democrats who know what’s going on closing their eyes to what’s going on and doing nothing is wrong.

The do-nothings are acting out the script written for them: the Democratic Party and its leadership count on Democrats not standing up to them and forcing them to act in a principled and ethical manner.

For generations the attitude and actions described herein have been visited on the Native American and Mexican American communities.

And for generations we have fought back and have not only survived, we have flourished!

That is because there have always been people in our communities who have refused to be apologists for, enablers of, injustice… people who have had the backbone to stand up and speak out and fight against injustice.

History teaches us that if enough people stop hanging around under the Democratic Party’s dinner table waiting for crumbs to fall our way, things can and do change. Our collective political behavior has to be driven by the irrefutable fact that our communities have paid their dues-- over and over again!-- over the years…we have earned a place at the dinner table.

And if one considers the historical fact that our communities often make the difference between Democrats’ winning and losing elections, our place should be at the head of the table!

What’s easy, and what takes courage… In Arizona, for Democrats it’s easy to criticize Russell Pearce, Jan Brewer, Joe Arpaio, Tom Horne, John Huppenthal and their partners in hate. No courage involved there. (Other states have their counterparts to Pearce, Brewer, Arpaio, et al.) What takes courage…integrity…principles is to confront those who claim to be on our side but who act against our interests…

What takes courage… integrity… principles is to declare that Democratic race-ethnic discrimination IS NOT qualitatively better than Republican race-ethnic discrimination. THAT’S where the backbone comes in! Those amongst us who have a full-grown, or even a budding, backbone need to organize ourselves outside of the Democratic Party apparatus and... GIVE AND WITHHOLD our votes and support on the basis of principle rather than the “Democratic racism is qualitatively better than Republican racism” hoax…viz.:

Support good issues and candidates on the basis of principle rather than opportunism… Oppose candidates who stand with those whose interests are inimical to our community’s interests… Take on openly and publicly the Democratic Party elite who treat our community as if they own us and take our support for granted… who apply a double standard to candidates of color… who work against our interests even as they demand and expect our support, etc.

Even a cursory study of history instructs us that the do-nothings… those who crave the approval of their superiors… those who are satisfied with crumbs rather than a full meal… those who accept race-ethnic discrimination as their due… are not the ones who influence the course of history and are indeed as much the enemy as the perpetrators of discriminatory actions.

A couple of quick questions in closing…

1. If Martin Luther King, Jr. and Cesar Chavez had been part of the do-nothing, sycophant, minion, and hanger-on crowd, would we revere and respect them as we do?

2. This question, to which I have yet to receive a cogent answer, is one I’ve been asking for decades. But I’m an optimist in whom hope springs eternal, so here it is again: If Democratic race-ethnic discrimination is qualitatively better than Republican race-ethnic discrimination-- as the Democratic Party and its sycophants, minions, and hangers-on insist-- and is something we should embrace… Does that mean we have been unjustly and unfairly demonizing the likes of Lester Maddox, George Wallace, Bull O’ Connor, and the KKK of the 1950s-1960s, all of whom were Democrats and operated under the auspices and with the full support of the Democratic Party, and therefore owe these fine Democrats an apology?

Tomorrow is voting day in AZ-01. In case you don't read The Guardian-- and if you're still not fully convinced by the arguments above-- let me recommend a column by Glenn Greenwald that was published yesterday, which warns of the dangers inherent in kissing up to power.

[I]t is very easy to get people to see oppression and tyranny in faraway places, but very difficult to get them to see it in their own lives ("How dare you compare my country to Tyranny X; we're free and they aren't"). In part that is explained by the way in which desire shapes perception. One naturally wants to believe that oppression is only something that happens elsewhere because one then feels good about one's own situation ("I'm free, unlike those poor people in those other places"). Thinking that way also relieves one of the obligation to act: one who believes they are free of oppression will feel no pressure to take a difficult or risky stand against it.

But the more significant factor is that one can easily remain free of even the most intense political oppression simply by placing one's faith and trust in institutions of authority. People who get themselves to be satisfied with the behavior of their institutions of power, or who at least largely acquiesce to the legitimacy of prevailing authority, are almost never subjected to any oppression, even in the worst of tyrannies.

Why would they be? Oppression is designed to compel obedience and submission to authority. Those who voluntarily put themselves in that state-- by believing that their institutions of authority are just and good and should be followed rather than subverted-- render oppression redundant, unnecessary.

Of course people who think and behave this way encounter no oppression. That's their reward for good, submissive behavior. As Rosa Luxemburg put this: "Those who do not move, do not notice their chains." They are left alone by institutions of power because they comport with the desired behavior of complacency and obedience without further compulsion.

But the fact that good, obedient citizens do not themselves perceive oppression does not mean that oppression does not exist. Whether a society is free is determined not by the treatment of its complacent, acquiescent citizens-- such people are always unmolested by authority-- but rather by the treatment of its dissidents and its marginalized minorities.

In the US, those are the people who are detained at airports and have their laptops and notebooks seized with no warrants because of the films they make or the political activism they engage in; or who are subjected to mass, invasive state surveillance despite no evidence of wrongdoing; or who are prosecuted and imprisoned for decades-- or even executed without due process-- for expressing political and religious views deemed dangerous by the government.

People who resist the natural human tendency to follow, venerate and obey prevailing authority typically have a much different view about how oppressive a society is than those who submit to those impulses. The most valuable experiences for determining how free a society is are the experiences of society's most threatening dissidents, not its content and compliant citizens. It was those who marched against Mubarak who were detained, beaten, tortured and killed, not those who acquiesced to or supported the regime. That is the universal pattern of authoritarian oppression.

The temptation to submit to authority examined by Compliance bolsters an authoritarian culture by transforming its leading institutions into servants of power rather than checks on it. But worse, it conceals the presence of oppression by ensuring that most citizens, choosing to follow, trust and obey authority, do not personally experience oppression and thus do not believe-- refuse to believe-- that it really exists.

Now, if you live in AZ-01, go out and do the right thing... for humankind.

Midterm Report: The Best and the Worst Democratic Freshmen

Time to grade the Democratic freshmen-- or at least to pick out the 10 best and the 10 worst. Which ones lived up to what Alan Grayson laid out in his little monologue above? And which served the interest of careerism and corporate special interests above the interests of their own constituents? Short version-- for people in a hurry-- here are two lists (alphabetized), the 10 best, followed b the 10 worst:

THE BEST:

• Tony Cardenas (D-CA)
• Matt Cartwright (D-PA)
• Alan Grayson (D-FL)
• Jared Huffman (D-CA)
• Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY)
• Joe Kennedy (D-MA)
• Alan Lowenthal (D-CA)
• Grace Meng (D-NY)
• Rick Nolan (D-MN)
• Mark Pocan (D-WI)

THE WORST:

• Cheri Bustos (D-IL)
• Pete Gallego (Blue Dog-TX)
• Joe Garcia (New Dem-FL)
• Ann Kirkpatrick (D-AZ)
• Dan Maffei (New Dem-NY)
• Sean Patrick Maloney (New Dem-NY)
• Patrick Murphy (New Dem-FL)
• Scott Peters (New Dem-CA)
• Raul Ruiz (D-CA)
• Kyrsten Sinema (New Dem-AZ)

The other day, Obama seemed to help justify the Egyptian military coup by declaring that democracy is about more than just elections. Eric Cantor liked that. The Washington Post didn't. You decide. Meanwhile, though, figuring out which congressmen did best and did worst is about more than just raw voting. Voting on bills that come to the floor is very, very important, of course, but there are other factors as well, like courageousness, leadership, behavior on committees, integrity. Example: freshmen who voted in the House Financial Services Committee-- so somewhat privately-- to gut Dodd-Frank Wall Street reforms and then piled onto a plane with Democratic corruptionist Joe Crowley to celebrate with Wall Street banksters, are never going to get on a 10 Best list. Freshmen with the guts and smarts to sign the Grayson-Takano No Cuts letter, however, have a leg up on any 10 Best list.

The 10 freshmen who signed that letter are a mixed bag though, including really excellent Members like Grayson himself, as well as Matt Cartwright and Rick Nolan and really awful sellouts looking for another way to bash Obama, like Ann Kirkpatrick, or for a cheap way to burnish progressive credentials for the folks back home, like Juan Vargas. These are the freshman signers (in order of date signed):

• Alan Grayson (D-FL)
• Mark Takano (D-CA)
• Rick Nolan (D-MN)
• Matt Cartwright (D-PA)
• Joyce Beatty (D-OH)
• Ann Kirkpatrick (D-AZ)
• Tony Cardenas (D-CA)
• Donald Payne (D-NJ)
• Dan Kildee (D-MI)
• Juan Vargas (D-CA)

The best freshman and the worst freshman each comes from Florida. Overall best is Alan Grayson, more than just a good voter-- a real leader and organizer. And please do watch that video up top. Ironically, the worst freshman, Patrick Murphy, is also a leader and an organizer-- he's leading other freshmen, really dumb ones, astray and organizing to help push through Boehner's toxic agenda. But let's get to the roll calls that we counted in assessing each freshman. We're listing them in chronological order, starting with a typical cheap trick by the GOP threatening that Members wouldn't get paid 'til a budget was passed. H.R. 325 passed on January 23, 285-144 with 86 Democrats joining most of the Republicans to pass it. It was the first big bill showing that most of the conservative New Dem freshmen would side with the GOP on their agenda. The freshmen who crossed the aisle: Ami Bera (CA), Julia Brownley (CA), Cheri Bustos (IL), Joaquin Castro (TX), John Delaney (MD), Suzan DelBene (WA), Tammy Duckworth (IL), Bill Enyart (IL), Elizabeth Esty (CT), Bill Foster (IL), Pete Gallego (TX), Denny Heck (WA), Steven Horsford (NV), Derek Kilmer (WA), Ann Kirkpatrick (AZ), Ann Kuster (NH), Alan Lowenthal (CA), Michelle Lujan Grisham (NM), Dan Maffei (NY), Sean Patrick Maloney (NY), Grace Meng (NY), Patrick Murphy (FL), Rick Nolan (MN), Beto O'Rourke (TX), Scott Peters (CA), Raul Ruiz (CA), Brad Schneider (IL), Kyrsten Sinema (AZ), Mark Takano (CA), Dina Titus (NV), and Filemon Vela (TX). Chief New Dem Ron Kind and DCCC chair Steve Israel also voted with the Republicans on this and strongly urged the freshmen to do likewise. It helped established a very bad pattern, a pattern that some have since seen through and have broken free of-- like Lowenthal, Nolan, and Takano-- but one that has ensnared too many freshmen in the quicksand of false bipartisanship. Every one of the 10 worst freshmen voted with the GOP on this early bill.

H.R. 444 passed on February 6 and it was another gimmicky GOP balanced budget bill. 26 Democrats joined 227 Republicans to pass it 253-167. The freshmen aisle crossers were Ami Bera (CA), Cheri Bustos (IL), Ann Kirkpatrick (AZ), Ann Kuster (NH), Dan Maffei (NY), Sean Patrick Maloney (NY), Patrick Murphy (FL), Scott Peters (CA), Raul Ruiz (CA), Kyrsten Sinema (AZ), and Dina Titus (NV). So here we were in February and the lines between the good freshmen and the bad freshmen were already starting to become very clear. Most of these would go on to back Boehner and Cantor from then right up until now.

H.R. 273 is intended to freeze the pay of federal employees. It passed 261-154, on February 15, Boehner and Cantor able to claim a bipartisan victory because of these largely worthless freshmen: Julia Brownley (CA), Cheri Bustos (IL), Suzan DelBene (WA), Bill Enyart (IL), Bill Foster (IL), Pete Gallego (TX), Joe Garcia (FL), Ann Kuster (NH), Dan Maffei (NY), Sean Patrick Maloney (NY), Patrick Murphy (FL), Scott Peters (CA), Raul Ruiz (CA), Brad Schneider (IL), Kyrsten Sinema (AZ) and Filemon Vela (TX). You should be starting to recognize the repeat offenders now.

H.R. 933 passed 267-151 on March 6 and the intention was to soften the blow of the sequester for the Pentagon while leaving all the other victims in the lurch. 53 bad Democrats went along with the GOP, including 28 freshmen, these freshmen: Ami Bera (CA), Julia Brownley (CA), Cheri Bustos (IL), Joaquin Castro (TX), Suzan DelBene (WA), Bill Enyart (IL), Elizabeth Esty (CT), Bill Foster (IL), Tulsi Gabbard (HI), Pete Gallego (TX), Joe Garcia (FL), Steven Horsford (NV), Ann Kirkpatrick (AZ), Ann Kuster (NH), Alan Lowenthal (CA), Michelle Grisham Lujan (NM), Dan Maffei (NY), Sean Patrick Maloney (NY), Patrick Murphy (FL), Gloria Negrete McLeod (CA), Beto O'Rourke (TX), Scott Peters (CA), Raul Ruiz (CA), Brad Schneider (IL), Kyrsten Sinema (AZ), Mark Takano (CA), Dina Titus and Marc Veasy (TX).

H.R. 890, meant to prevent the federal government from giving states greater flexibility when complying with a welfare program’s work requirements, passed 246-181 on March 13. Only 18 Democrats crossed the aisle on this one, including 8 freshmen: Ami Bera (CA), Joe Garcia (FL), Ann Kirkpatrick (AZ), Dan Maffei (NY), Sean Patrick Maloney (NY), Patrick Murphy (FL), Scott Peters (CA), and Kyrsten Sinema (AZ), the ones Boehner and Cantor were coming to depend on pretty consistently to make their awful bills "bipartisan."

H Con Res 25 on March 20 was the budget bill. There were a lot of alternatives, starting with a proposal to pass the budget the Senate had already passed, not a great budget, but not nearly as bad as the Ryan budget the House was about to vote on. The Senate budget was defeated in the House 154-261 with 35 Democratic defectors including the 17 worst freshmen: Ami Bera (CA), Julia Brownley (CA), Cheri Bustos (IL), John Delaney (MD), Bill Enyart (IL), Bill Foster (IL), Pete Gallego (TX), Joe Garcia (FL), Ann Kirkpatrick (AZ), Ann Kuster (NH), Dan Maffei (NY), Sean Patrick Maloney (NY), Patrick Murphy (FL), Scott Peters (CA), Raul Ruiz (CA), Brad Schneider (IL) and Kyrsten Sinema (AZ).

When Raul Grijalva introduced the Progressive Caucus budget alternative-- the only budget that would have solved the problems plaguing America-- it lost 84-327. Only 13 freshmen voted FOR it, the better freshmen: Joyce Beatty (OH), Tony Cardenas (CA), Matt Cartwright (PA), Alan Grayson (FL), Jared Huffman (CA), Hakeem Jeffries (NY), Alan Lowenthal (CA), Rick Nolan (MN), Don Payne (NJ), Mark Pocan (WI), Mark Takano (CA), Juan Vargas (CA), and Marc Veasy (TX).

The House Democratic Caucus budget wasn't as good as the one Grijalva proposed but it was still way better than Ryan's. It lost 165-253 and really did encompass a vision for what the House Democrats would like to accomplish. 28 bad Democrats voted against it including 17 freshmen: Ami Bera (CA), Julia Brownley (CA), Cheri Bustos (IL), Suzan DelBene (WA), Bill Enyart (IL), Bill Foster (IL), Pete Gallego (TX), Joe Garcia (FL), Ann Kirkpatrick (AZ), Ann Kuster (NH), Dan Maffei (NY), Sean Patrick Maloney (NY), Patrick Murphy (FL), Scott Peters (CA), Raul Ruiz (CA), Brad Schneider (IL) and Kyrsten Sinema (AZ)-- all the worst garbage in the caucus.

H.R. 624, CISPA, was a domestic spying bill that passed 288-127 on April 18. The Democratic caucus was very split-- 98 against and 92 for. The bad freshmen should be very predictable for you by now, although a few weak links among usually not-as-bad-Democrats went along with it as well: Joyce Beatty (OH), Ami Bera (CA), Julia Brownley (CA), Cheri Bustos (IL), Tony Cardenas (CA), Tammy Duckworth (IL), Bill Enyart (IL), Bill Foster (IL), Loius Frankel (FL), Pete Gallego (TX), Joe Garcia (FL), Denny Heck (WA), Steven Horsford (NV), Hazeem Jeffries (NY), Robin Kelly (IL), Derek Kilmer (WA), Ann Kirkpatrick (AZ), Ann Kuster (NH), Michelle Lujan Grisham (NM), Dan Maffei (NY), Sean Patrick Maloney (NY), Grace Meng (NY), Patrick Murphy (FL), Don Payne (NJ), Scott Peters (CA), Raul Ruiz (CA), Brad Schneider (IL), Kyrsten Sinema (AZ), Eric Swalwell (CA), Dina Titus (NV), Juan Vargas (CA), Marc Veasey (TX) and Filemon Vela (TX).

H.R. 1062 was another conservative initiative to weaken regulations on Wall Street. It passed 235-161 on May 17 with 17 Democrats voting with the Republicans, including 9 freshmen-- Ami Bera (CA), Tony Cardenas (CA), Pete Gallego (TX), Dan Maffei (NY), Sean Patrick Maloney (NY), Scott Peters (CA), Raul Ruiz (CA), Brad Schneider (IL) and Kyrsten Sinema (AZ).

H.R. 3 was a big one-- the Keystone XL Pipeline bill on May 22. It passed 241-175 with 19 Democrats going along for the ride, including 5 anti-environment freshmen: Cheri Bustos (IL), Bill Enyart (IL), Sean Patrick Maloney (NY), Patrick Murphy (FL) and Filemon Vela (TX).

H.R. 1911 was also a big one-- the GOP bill to double the rate on student loans. Only 4 Democrats were stupid enough to vote for that one and 3 are New Dem freshmen with terrible records: Joe Garcia (FL), Dan Maffei (NY) and Scott Peters (CA).

H.R. 1947 was the failed Farm Bill that shredded food stamps for the most needy Americans. Only 24 Democrats voted for it, including 8 freshmen: Ami Bera (CA), Julia Brownley (CA), Cheri Bustos (IL), Bill Enyart (IL), Joe Garcia (FL), Patrick Murphy (FL), Kyrsten Sinema (AZ), and Filemon Vela (TX). There were a ton of amendments that showed how bad some of these freshmen are including one to defund farmers markets by Tom McClintock that drew exactly one "Democratic" vote: New Dem Patrick Murphy (FL). 8 Democrats voted against Jim McGovern's amendment to reinstate the SNAP food stamp funding and 2 of them were freshmen-- Cheri Bustos (IL) and Sean Patrick Maloney (NY).

H.R. 1613 and H.R. 2231 passed June 27 and 28, the two most recent Republican travesties. Both bills, written by Oil and Gas lobbyists, were big giveaways for offshore drilling businesses. The only Democratic freshmen to go along with either or both of them were Ami Bera (CA), Cheri Bustos (IL), John Delaney (MD), Pete Gallego (TX), Joe Garcia (FL), Patrick Murphy (FL), Scott Peters (CA), Raul Ruiz (CA), Kyrsten Sinema (AZ) Marc Veasey (TX) and Filemon Vela (TX).

Don't forget, this report card is only for freshmen. We didn't count Ron Barber (New Dem-AZ) as a freshman and he's literally worse than any of the freshmen. So are 4 other more senior Democrats, the worst of their party in the House, by far. From bad to worse (with their ProgressivePunch scores):

• Collin Peterson (Blue Dog-MN)- 40.00
• Bill Owens (New Dem)-NY)- 33.33
• John Barrow (Blue Dog/New Dem-GA)- 28.33
• Jim Matheson (Blue Dog-UT)- 26.67

This year, six Republicans have voted more frequently with the Democrats on crucial roll calls than Matheson and Barrow. The DCCC will spend an estimated $4 million in a desperate and pointless attempt to reelect both of them.

Watch the Grayson video up top again-- and keep it in your mind the next time the DCCC asks you for money. Virtually all of it that doesn't wind up their cronies' pockets, goes to reelect these Democrats who vote most frequently with the GOP. In the clip, Grayson reminds Democratic candidates running for office that "If you have two Republicans running against each other, one with an 'R-e-p' next to his name and one with a 'D-e-m' next to his name, it's a tremendous disservice to the public. The public can't choose that way. And if you run as a Democrat, then there are certain things you should stand for. You should stand for Justice. You should stand for Equality. You should stand for Peace... We need more Democrats who are Democrats... You can't beat a Republican by BEING a Republican."

There's A Big Primary In The Tucson Area Tomorrow-- And it Could Be Waterloo For Another DCCC Candidate

The DCCC didn't have the decency wait for local Democratic voters to pick a candidate to run for the AZ-02 nomination. They just barreled in and endorsed-- and spent tons of money on-- the most conservative of the 7 Democrats in the race, Ann Kirkpatrick. Kirpatrick isn't from southern Arizona but she "moved" down to Tucson-- if she even did (she seems to live in Phoenix and just goes down to Tucson to visit her grandchildren and to campaign)-- to get back into Congress.

The 2 most recent polls-- one done for Kirkpatrick's campaign and one done for Matt Heinz's campaign-- both show Heinz slightly ahead, although a source inside the DCCC told me their own poll shows Heinz beating their candidate by 5 points. She's outspent him two-to-one and money has poured into the district, not just from the DCCC, mostly to introduce her to the locals, but from the contemptible No Labels network of dirty money SuperPACs funded by conservative billionaires (particularly the Murdoch family.) Why would wealthy Republicans be spending so much money in a Democratic primary?

Easy: whichever Democrat wins the primary is going to be the next AZ-02 member of Congress. The day Martha McSally announced she was running for the seat, Paul Ryan's SuperPAC folded up it's tent, shut down the Tucson campaign office and snuck out of town in the dead of night. They know very well that Republican Lea Marquez Peterson isn't going to win. She's not just like Trump policy-wise; she's brags incessantly about what a great businesswoman she is-- the way he did-- and then ignores questions about her gigantic bankruptcy-- like he did. Knowing that a Democrat has a 90% chance, Republican donors looked at Kirkpatrick's record and Heinz's record; it was no contest. Kirkpatrick is the best Republican running in the AZ-02 Democratic primary.

Matt Heinz is a progressive. Kirkpatrick, a New Dem, was an NRA star-- who publicly boasted she would protect them from Obama and who got an "A" rating from them. (As part of her campaign of lies and deception, she and her unscrupulous allies have been sending out mailers calling Heinz the NRA candidate to confuse voters. But that isn't the real reason why she's getting so much money from rich Republican contributors. What the Murdochs and their pals are most excited about is that Kirkpatrick voted with the GOP against Wall Street reform (Dodd-Frank), with the GOP on extending the Bush tax cuts, with the GOP on turning Medicare into a voucher program and, in general, voting with the GOP far more frequently than most Democrats. If you can't get a real Republican, you go for someone from the Republican wing of the Democratic Party. And that's Ann Kirkpatrick... always has been; always will be.

Her GOP allies are spending hundreds of thousands of dollars smearing Heinz. She has been moaning that Heinz's policy-oriented compare-and-contrast ads are "negative" but her negative mailers-- 3 on Friday alone-- are part of a tidal wave of slime and negativity. One of Politico's worst fools, Elena Schneider, wrote a lazy, misleading piece yesterday that doesn't even mention that Kirkpatrick is getting help from billionaire Republicans, like the Murdochs (which you'd think her editor and readers might be confused about). She also seems to have not bothered to explain where the negativity started in this race. Schneider also kept hammering home that Kirkpatrick, an arch conservative, is "a moderate." The word "moderate" is the most admired political description in U.S. politics. The opposite of "moderate" is what... radical? extremist? fanatical? What? Matt Heinz's policy agenda is in tune with what Americans want-- nice and moderate. Ann Kirkpatrick is way to the right of what Americans want-- positions so so conservative that the Murdochs and their Wall Street allies are bankrolling her (ironically, along with the DCCC-- yes, strange bed-fellows indeed). Elena needs to go back for some emergency journalism courses... stat.

How much like a Republican does she sound, especially at the end of this video where she brags about her "A" from the NRA? In fact this is how she greeted the NRA when they held their convention in Phoenix. "I am not going to allow Washington to ignore the values of Arizonans' and the traditions of four generations of my family in District One, and I am proud to be pushing back against the federal government to stop our Constitutional rights from being infringed. Every time the anti-gun rights groups propose legislation that restricts our freedoms, I am going to make sure they know millions of Americans will fight them every inch of the way." (And she lies right to the voters and says Heinz is the NRA candidate!) Don't forget to vote tomorrow. Washington is already too full of politicians just like Ann Kirkpatrick.

The Same People Who Backed Corrupt Conservative Tim Holden Are Also Behind Ann Kirkpatrick In Arizona

Raul & Wenona, 2 champions of working families

Breaking yet another promise to stay neutral in active primaries, the DCCC came lumbering into AZ-1 this week, in favor of conservative loser Ann Kirkpatrick who lost her seat in 2010 because Democrats stayed away from the polls, sickened by her tendency to vote with the GOP on crucial roll calls. This time the district is much more Democratic-leaning... so much so that incumbent Paul Gosar, the teabagger who beat Kirkpatrick fled west to a friendlier, redder district. The reason the district is friendlier territory for Democrats now is because blood red-- and all white-- Yavapai County has been separated from it. The first congressional district is now 40% Democrat, 30%, Republican, and 30% Independent. Demographically, it is 22% Native American, and 19% Latino. AZ-1 has
the highest percentage of Native Americans of district in the country, by a wide margin. Funny how some DCCC hack called a white progressive the other day and whined that he shouldn't run because there are so many Latinos in his district but in this case, when Native Americans have their own candidate in the most Native America district in he country, the DCCC is sabotaging her race.

Wenona Baldenegro has galvanized the Native American and Latino communities of the district, as well as the all-important progressive bastion of Flagstaff, who are rallying around her strong environmental positions and her message of standing up for the middle-class and the 99%. In 2010, as we've been trying to explain for two years, the people of AZ-1 DID NOT come out to vote for Ann Kirkpatrick. From the biggest newspaper in the district:

Don't credit a tea party-driven Republican surge for electing Paul Gosar in the First Congressional District.

Instead, blame Democrats and independents for staying home in record numbers, costing U.S. Rep. Ann Kirkpatrick, D-Flagstaff, her seat... Kirkpatrick's tally in 2010 fell off by a whopping 68,000 votes, or 44 percent.

...Informal surveys late in the campaign confirmed an indifference by Democrats to Kirkpatrick, in part because she had broken with the Obama White House on key issues such as carbon cap and trade and Wall Street regulation.

The DCCC doesn't get this... or doesn't want to. They don't want an independent-minded progressive like Wenona Baldenegro, a close ally of Raul Grijalva, in Congress. Alarm bells rings for corporate conservatives like Hoyer and Israel and Wasser,man Schultz, whose power derives from their ability to aggregate bribes, when they hear something like this from Wenona: "I'm honored that both co-chairs of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, Rep. Grijalva and Rep. Ellison, have endorsed my campaign. The CPC has done an incredible job of holding the line for the working families of America, at a time of unprecedented attacks. And they need help. I am ready to get in there and stand with them to fight for working families, protect Medicare and Social Security, and protect our environment to ensure clean air and water for future generations." Hoyer and his clique want a weak, easily corruptible conservative like Kikpatrick who will stay loyal to Hoyer and the conservative faction in control of the DCCC. Wenona has the support on the ground to win. Below we'll compare who is endorsing Wenona and who-- aside from Hoyer and sleazy "ex"-Blue Dog Steve Israel-- is endorsing Kirkpatrick.

Kirkpatrick is very cozy with ALEC, the payday-loan industry, and Corrective Corporation of America (CCA). CCA is the giant of the private prison industry that profits from laws such as SB1070. Here are the lobbyists, that we know of, who have donated to Kirkpatrick, and who they are affiliated with.

Martin Shultz - Former Chief Lobbyist for Arizona Public Service (APS). APS is a member-in-good-standing of ALEC. Shultz is also a lobbyist for Brownstein, Hyatt, Farber, and Schreck, which co-chairs the shady ALEC Energy, Environment and Agriculture Task Force. Shultz, Senior Policy Director in BHFS's Phoenix office and a member of the BHFS Government Relations group, is BHFS' representative on the ALEC Energy, Environment and Agriculture Task Force, as of 2011. (Shultz is also listed as VP of Government Affairs at Pinnacle West Capital Corporation, also an ALEC member). He maxed out to John McCain, when he ran for President.

Victor Flores-- Current lobbyist for APS; former lobbyist for Salt River Project (SRP), also an ALEC member. Has given $3000 to Kirkpatrick, over the course of her Congressional career.

Mario Diaz-- Over the course of her career, Kirkpatrick has accepted $8600 from Mario Diaz, Arizona's number one lobbyist for the payday-loan industry. 

Dennis DeConcini-- This guy is a real piece-of-work. He is a former crooked Democratic U.S. Senator from Arizona who has made quite the career as a lobbyist, after he retired. As a member of the Senate, he was part of the "Keating Five," along with McCain, which was a huge banking and political contribution scandal in the '80s. Forced to retire, DeConcini became a lobbyist for, among others, Corrective Corporation of America (CCA), where he now sits on the Board of Directors. CCA, in conjunction with ALEC, wrote SB1070 with Russell Pearce and others, in order to profit from the incarceration of immigrants. The private prison industry is now a multi-billion dollar industry, and DeConcini makes $175,000 just to sit on their board. He then turns around and donates that money to candidates like Kirkpatrick. To add insult to injury, DeConcini endorsed and made robocalls for Sheriff Joe Arpaio, maybe the most corrupt, racist sheriff in America.

Now compare that crew of sleazebag lobbyists (and that was just the tip of a very toxic iceberg-- along with the corrupt hacks at the DCCC-- to who has endorsed Wenona:

United Steelworkers of America
IAMAW (Machinists Union)
AFSCME #449 (Pima County)

Raul Grijalva - U.S. Congressman (AZ-7)
Linda Sanchez - U.S. Congresswoman (CA-39)
Keith Ellison - U.S. Congressman (MN-5)
Joe Baca - U.S. Congressman (CA-43)

Johnny Naize - Speaker of the Council, Navajo Nation
Dennis Welsh - Councilmember and Treasurer, Colorado River Indian Tribes
Ben Nuvamsa - Former Chairman, Hopi Tribe
Dr. Octaviana Trujillo - Former Chairwoman, Pascua Yaqui Tribe; first woman to serve as Chairperson of Pascua Yaqui Tribe
Herminia Frias - Former Chairwoman, Pascua Yaqui Tribe

San Carlos Apache Tribe
Colorado River Indian Tribes
Pascua Yaqui Tribe
Tohono O'odham Nation
Tulalip Tribes of Washington
San Manuel Band of Serrano Mission Indians
Soboba Band of Luiseño Indians

Sierra Club Arizona
Progressive Democrats of America

Steve Gallardo - AZ State Senator (LD13)
Bruce Wheeler - AZ State Representative (LD28)
Catherine Miranda - AZ State Representative (LD16)
Sally Ann Gonzales - AZ State Representative (LD27); first American Indian woman to serve in the Arizona State Legislature
Dr. Macario Saldate - AZ State Representative (LD27)
Martin Quezada - AZ State Representative (LD13)

Jonathan Nez - Navajo County Board of Supervisors (District 1)

Andy Bessler - Sierra Club
Cecilia Cruz - Co-founder, Pima County/Tucson Women's Commission
Shonto Begay - Navajo artist/civil rights leader
Randy Parraz - Former AFL-CIO Director for Arizona
Dr. Frances Riemer - Professor, NAU Women's and Gender Studies
Alfredo Gutierrez - Former Arizona Senate Democratic Leader
Daniel R. Ortega - Civil rights leader; National Board Chairman of the NCLR
John Loredo - Former Arizona House of Representatives Democratic Leader
Ken Smith - Former Senior Vice-Chair, Arizona Democratic Party
Howard Shanker - Former Arizona CD-1 candidate, environmental attorney
Barbara Smith - Former Chairwoman, White Mountain Democrats
Salomon R. Baldenegro - Former Dean/Professor, University of Arizona; Southwest U.S. civil rights icon

If Kirkpatrick is elected to Congress she will owe half the lobbyists on K Street-- the last thing working people and consumers in Arizona should want. Wenona is a far better choice and if you can spare even a small amount, you can contribute to her campaign on a special Blue America page we set up to send a message to the DC Democrats.

Ann Kirkpatrick Sucks-- And She Has Always Sucked... Which Is Why Fox News Loves Her

We've been writing about Arizona New Dem Ann Kirkpatrick for years-- here are some of the most recent. She's awful and always has been. So while everyone has been talking about how Fox and Friends accidentally put a real Democrat on the air, Barbara L'Italien by accident, I want to make sure people know why Fox and Friends recognized Kirkpatrick as a friend and how eager they were to get her on the air to bash Democratic values.

First as couple off words about Massachusetts state Senator Barbara L'Italien, a candidate for Congress in the open-- and very crowded-- Niki Tsongas seat, which stretches along the northern border of the state from Haverhill, Lawrence, Andover and Lowell through Groten Acton and Concord out to Fitchburg and Winchendon. The PVI is D+9 andTrump only took 35% of the vote there. Of the 14 Democrats vying to replace Tsongas, 3 have significantly outraised L'Italien ($701,881)-- Dan Koh ($2,989,826), Rufus Gifford ($1,343,897) and Lori Trahan ($1,133,585). Whichever Democrat wins the September 4 primary might as well start packing for Congress September 5.

Monday morning Fox and Friends called the L'Italien campaign by accident, looking for the cruddy conservative Democrat who always agrees with the Fox perspective. A L'Italien staffer, Joe Katz, saw his opportunity to get his candidate on the air and grabbed it resulting in the awesome video at the top of the page. Knowing that Fox and Friends is Trumpanzee's favorite early morning viewing, L'Italian ignored the hosts' inane question (for Kirkpatrick) and looked into the camera and said "I'm actually here to speak directly to Donald Trump. I feel that what's happening at the border is wrong. I believe that separating kids from their parents is illegal and inhumane." She said who she is and continued: "We have to stop abducting children and ripping them from their parents’ arms, stop putting kids in cages, and stop making 3-year-olds defend themselves in court," very much not the messaging Fox hosts Jillian Mele and Rob Schmitt wanted on the air, nor the message Ann Kirkpatrick is interested in being put out either. She admits she would have voted with the handful of right-wing and racist Democrats who went along with the GOP last week in backing ICE. That's always been Kirkpatrick-- and always will be... a Republican with a "D" next to her name. The DCCC backs her all the way and has been spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to make sure she-- and not progressives Matt Heinz or Mary Matiella-- wins the August 28 primary.



AZ-02 is the Tucson-based southern Arizona district Ann Kirkpatrick is trying to win. She's from northern Arizona and represented a district up there. She doesn't live in southern Arizona but visits her grandchildren in Tucson from time to time. She was the poster child for the NRA, who has always graded her an "A" and it doesn't surprise anyone that she backs ICE. She's always been at the very heart of the Republican wing of the Democratic Party.



This morning, I spoke with Heinz just as he was getting off his night shift at the hospital he works at. "I was flabbergasted," he told me, "to see Ann raise her hand to support ICE with no additional reform or changes in oversight. But I was in no way surprised to see her once again change her answer the second it wasn't convenient for her. This has become a pattern of hers; she'll say one thing and then immediately try to say the opposite just to further her political agenda. I strongly believe in the need for a massive overhaul of ICE and a change of leadership that starts at the very top with electing a new president. To allow the status-quo to continue is simply unacceptable to me and to the voters of Southern Arizona. The people don't have faith in our political system because politicians flip-flop between answers to whichever is most convenient in the moment. This is exactly why national entities, and the DCCC in particular, need to let the voters decide who can best represent their community before coming in to back a particular candidate. DC insiders just don't understand Southern Arizona and it's becoming increasing clear to anyone paying attention that neither does Ann."

Ann Kirkpatrick Makes The Case Well: Why She Doesn't Deserve To Be Re-Elected

A vote to bail out foreign bankers will defeat her in 2010

Last year there were few primary races anywhere in America with as marked a contrast between an excellent candidate and a completely unqualified one as in the race for the open seat in Arizona's vast 1st CD. Howard Shanker was the progressive grassroots candidate and the Establishment mediocrity was now Congresswoman Ann Kirkpatrick. As a member of Congress Kirkpatrick has proven what was obvious to any observer-- residents of AZ-01 still have the least effective representation of anyplace in America.

Like other right-wing, corporate shills, Kirkpatrick calls her abysmal Republican voting record "independent." "Independent of Democratic principles and values" would be a better way to describe it. As this morning's CQPolitics explained:

Kirkpatrick was one of eight House Democrats who opposed a bill (HR 1664) to limit the payment of bonuses to employees of companies that receive federal aid under so-called “bailout” legislation. She was one of three Democrats who voted against a bill (HR 1728) aimed at overhauling mortgage lending practices and curbing what supporters describe as “predatory” lending practices-- but which opponents described as over-regulation.

Basically whenever it comes to a choice between working families and her big corporate donors, Kirkpatrick crosses the aisle and votes with the GOP in favor of the corporate special interests that have devastated the country's-- and her constituents'-- finances. Washington observers consider her to be one of the most dimwitted and ineffective members of Congress and a complete waste of a seat. The only positive thing we've ever heard about her from anyone was that she dresses neatly every day and that she's not a crook like her predecessor, Rick Renzi-- although she does tend to vote almost exactly like him.

Renzi's still waiting trial on multiple corruption, fraud and money-laundering charges but Kirkpatrick is carrying on his tradition of unresponsive and incompetent representation for Arizona. "She's definitely the weakest member of the delegation," one staffer told us today. "She was well-financed though and the DCCC was pushing her."

The upside of the DCCC push is that she owes them-- big time. The party never asks her to compromise her "independence" and let's her vote with the GOP whenever she likes-- which is almost always, at least when it comes to contentious, substantive legislation. But this week is different. This week, Kirkpatrick is being forced to vote for a $108 billion bailout for European bankers. It's a vote most observers in Arizona politics say will cost her her seat. But this is one the powers inside the Democratic Party-- particularly Rahm Emanuel, Obama's Karl Rove-- are demanding. Kirkpatrick doesn't have the nerve to defy him.

She joined the reactionary Blue Dog caucus as soon as she was elected and claims to be against massive government spending programs. Although Emanuel has attempted to wrap this one up in pretty bows and disguise it as support for our troops and for the car industry, the $108 billion bailout for foreign banks has caused John Shadegg (R-AZ), Trent Franks (R-AZ), Jeff Flake (R-AZ), to join Raul Grijalva (D-AZ) in opposing the bill.

The Republican party has been targeting her as a tool of Nancy Pelosi. It isn't true and it hasn't stuck. But with her vote for the European bank bailout that Pelosi is pushing this week, it will stick-- and stick hard enough to defeat Kirkpatrick in 2010. Sources close to state Rep. Bill Konopnicki, the NRCC's #1 choice to run against her, say that if Kirkpatrick votes for the bailout, as expected, Konopnicki will jump into the race because it's an issue he can win with, easily.

Randy Pullen and his family have donated many thousands of dollars to Arizona Republicans and Pullen has recently become the treasurer of the RNC. The Pullen family is very confident that Kirkpatrick has no chance to survive a vote for a foreign bank bailout, which they also feel will take down two other Arizona Blue Dogs, Harry Mitchell and Gabby Giffords, both of whom are likely to follow Emanuel's lead into what looks more and more like a Democratic Party Suicide Pact.

“We have three districts, two of which are Republican districts that are held by Democrats, one of which is a slightly Democrat district that is held by a Democrat, but it’s a very conservative district,” Pullen said, referring to Arizona seats held by Democrat Reps. Gabrielle Giffords, Harry Mitchell and Ann Kirkpatrick, all of whom will be Republican targets in 2010.

“We have some opportunities, I think, in Arizona.”

Giffords has drawn an early challenger, while Mitchell will face the winner of what is so far a two-way primary. Arizona Republicans hope to woo State Rep. Bill Konopnicki, who flirted with a bid in 2008, to run against Kirkpatrick.

“I hope he does (run). I think he’ll be a great candidate,” Pullen said of Konopnicki. “I think he held off last time because he realized it was just a really tough environment for Republicans in 2008.”

Pullen said he had spoken with Konopnicki several times, and that he expects a formal decision within four or five weeks.

Here's a message on this that went out to bloggers in Arizona today. They didn't even bother mentioning Kirkpatrick-- as though she were just another Republican:



UPDATE: Late Breaking News

Jane Hamsher reports that Kirkpatrick may have been frightened into standing up to Emanuel and voting "no" tomorrow. Blue Dogs who don't will suffer at the polls next year. And Emanuel knows he's starting to lose them. So what's his latest strategy? We hear he's turning to vulnerable Republicans and telling them he can get the DCCC to "go easy" on them next year if they vote for the Supplemental tomorrow. It's one thing if he makes a deal with Vern Buchanan in Florida or Chris Smith in New Jersey, but we're hearing that he's offering to protect Republicans who have been slated as major DCCC targets, like Thaddeus McCotter (R-MI), Bill Young (R-FL), Leonard Lance R-NJ) and Charlie Dent (R-PA). Watch tomorrow to see if any of these characters cross over and vote with Team Emanuel to bail out European bankers.

And speaking of Rahm, there was a passage I read this morning in Charles Pierces' book, Idiot America by an angry Minnesota congressman:

If there be in our midst one low, sordid, vulgar soul... one tongue leprous with slander; one mouth which is like unto a den of foul beasts giving forth deadly odors; if there be one character which, while blotched and spotted all over, yet raves and rants and blackguards like a prostitute; if there be one bold, bad, empty, bellowing demagogue, it is the gentleman from Illinois."

Fits to a t, huh?

Ignore The Beltway Committees And The Fools Who Take Them Seriously; They're Always Wrong

I'd love to know who hired PPP to poll the dozen House districts they polled this week. Notice that in some districts they polled the incumbent Republican against some crap Republican-lite conservaDem the DCCC is pushing-- Ann Kirkpatrick, Jason Crow, Angie Craig, Chrissy Houlahan-- even though there are competitive progressives in the races. Example: of course the DCCC honchos (who probably commissioned the poll) are excited about a rotgut loser like carpetbagger Ann Kirkpatrick from Northern Arizona, but Democrats in the South Arizona district are laughing at her opportunism and aren't especially likely to nominate her to run against Martha McSally. Jason Crow may be a wet dream for Ben Gay Lujan but Democrats who don't exist inside the Beltway are at least as likely to nominate progressive Levi Tillerman than the manufactured Crow. And so on and so on. On the other hand, though Doug Applegate is way ahead of the rich establishment candidates the DCCC prefers to run against Issa-- yes, the DCCC only lives to lose; it's the only thing they know how to do-- instead of polling Applegate, the polled "generic Dem." It's the only contest where the Democrat has an absolute majority but I'm sure the DCCC was afraid if they had Applegate's name in there with those numbers, it would have killed the imaginary chances for Ira Lechner grandfather clock cleaner Mike Levin which would have made right-wing Dem and DCCC stooge Kyle Layman cry.

Anyway, enjoy the chart; the establishment conservatives aren't doing that great against the Republicans, are they? Abby Finkenauer is ahead of Rod Blumin IA-01, but she's a progressive. New Dem endorsees (Republican wing of the Democratic Party) Chrissy Houlahan and Angie Craig are losing and Kirkpatrick only manages to tie McSally (in a district Hillary beat Trumpanzee in 49.6% to 44.7%). Anyway, with those polls in mind, let's turn to the Beltway pundits who're usually better at explain what happened than in predicting what will happen: Cook. They just changed some House ratings for the midterms, all but one downgrades for the Republicanos. The one that isn't a GOP downgrade is just a rote thing they do about an open seat, in this case Sinema's AZ-09, which has a PVI of D+4, was won by Obama both times (with 51%) and where Hillary stomped on Señor Trumpanzee 54.7% to 38.4%. Not even the DCCC could lose this one, but Cook moved it from solid Dem to likely Dem. Whatever.

The 3 most serious downgrades are all from lean Republican to Toss Up. Cook is so conservative in their prognosticating that "lean Republican" usually means the Democrat will win unless the DCCC screws up royally by winning the nomination for a fake Democrat and turning off grassroots voters, something they do very frequently. The 3 in this category are AZ-02, where they are trying to shove piece-of-crap-candidate Ann Kirkpatrick down voters' throats; CA-48, where they are trying to shove an even worse piece-of-crap-candidate, Hans Keirstead, down voters throats; and IA-01 where they seem content to let moderately progressive Abby Finkenauer have the nomination. David Wasserman wrote up all the ratings changes. When he writes crap like "For example, Democrats are rightfully excited about former federal prosecutor Jay Hulings, he means establishment Democrats in DC, not actual Democrats; he may never have met one, I'm not sure. Hulings was endorsed by the Blue Dogs and the New Dems and the DCCC is pushing him on... people like Wasserman. He's strictly Republican wing of the Democratic Party manufactured as a candidate in the DCCC factory for a district that is 71% Latino-- and, of course, they are eager for him to beat the progressive Latino, Rick Treviño, who's running on the Bernie issues grassroots Dems love and DC Dems fear and loath. So take everything he writes with a grain of salt, like when he calls the very right-wing shit bag Kirkpatrick, an especially stinky New Dem "an unabashed progressive" who is planning to trick voters regarding the carpetbagger label because she can play up how she has two grandchildren who were recently born prematurely. Wasserman makes the point that McSally's vote Trumpcare in the moderate district repeal "may endanger her independent reputation and put her back in jeopardy."

AZ-02- [T]he Democratic frontrunner is former 1st CD Rep. Ann Kirkpatrick, who moved from Northern Arizona to Tucson following her losing challenge to McCain in 2016.

Kirkpatrick is running as an unabashed progressive defender of the ACA and has the support of former Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and Mark Kelly. She'll also seek to deflect the carpetbagger label by talking about moving to Tucson to care for her family based there, including two grandchildren who were recently born prematurely months after the 2016 election. It also helps that she's advertised in Tucson in all of her congressional races.

Kirkpatrick won't have a free ride in the primary: 2016 nominee Matt Heinz is probably her most serious competition, but former Assistant Army Secretary Mary Matiella, former state Rep. Bruce Wheeler and hotel manager Billy Kovacs are running too. However, Giffords's endorsement of Kirkpatrick will be difficult for others to overcome. If Democrats are to take back the House, this is a must-win race.

CA-48- Rohrabacher's profile as a surfing, pro-marijuana conservative has played well in this part of Orange County since 1988. But as this coastal district's demographics have changed, Rohrabacher has taken a different turn: his recent sympathetic comments towards Russia and strange interactions with Julian Assange and internet conspiracy theorist Chuck Johnson could amount to self-sabotage in a district President Trump narrowly lost.

Democrats in DC are thrilled with Hans Keirstead, a stem cell and cancer researcher who founded a biotech company that was sold for $126 million. Keirstead will talk about helping spinal cord injury victims recover function and the need to cut through FDA red tape. He's not just new to politics, he's new to the country: he grew up in Canada, still speaks with a Canadian accent and only became a U.S. citizen in 2008.

Keirstead is confident he can get past real estate businessman Harley Rouda in the primary and peel off Rohrabacher's corporate support, but his political skills are still unproven to say the least. Rohrabacher allies insist voters aren't focused on Russia and appreciate his "independent streak," but Democrats can also make the case that 30 years in Congress is too long. This is one of Democrats' best takeover opportunities in California.

I can't do it... this guy is such a DCCC tool and so clueless that I can't put his crap on my blog. If you want more of the DCCC perspective just go to the page. He's like a stenographer with ZERO value add. Didn't even mention Laura Oatman, the progressive woman in the race, probably because he doesn't know she exists because the DCCC didn't spoon-feed him any info on her. Keirstead and Rouda with both endorsed by the New Dems... what more does anyone need to know? What drivel!

Decision Desk HQ changed its 2018 forecast model yesterday, recognizing that ole Bob Dylan aphorism about Mr. Jones. "Up until now," they admit without a trace of embarrassment or irony, "our forecast of the 2018 House midterms has been pretty grim for Democrats. It has noted a 7-8 percentage point Democratic advantage in the generic ballot and calculated a 32% chance of Democrats winning control of the House majority. It has come to that conclusion via a mix of national polls, district-level predictions, and simulations designed to parameterize the error in our measurement." Their new computer model gives the Democrats not a 32% chance of taking over the House but a 46% chance. If you click on the link above you'll get their very wonky numerical analysis, which is somewhat interesting and worth reading. It certainly beats taking stenography from the DCCC. I'll end with their recap:

Our initial reporting on the 2018 midterm race emphasized the seat share estimates produced by a linear model. Reporting also favored the probabilities produced by a simulated range of possibilities that had been adjusted to match that model, rather than allowing it to speak for itself. We’ve done away with that adjustment now. As a result, the probability that Democrats win back the House in 2018 has increased from 32% to 45%, a very meaningful difference. We are also choosing to emphasize reporting the median and mode (most likely outcome) of these simulations rather than the strict estimate of the aforementioned linear model-- again, 215 seats now instead of 208.

We think that the changes more accurately reflect the distributional dynamics at play in the 2018 House midterms: notably, the 5-6x greater number of possibly vulnerable Republicans than possibly vulnerable Democrats.

Before our change, we were saying “Our best guess of the Democratic Party’s share of House seats after the 2018 midterms, according to a simple model, is 208 seats. A simulation, which accounts for the chance that we are wrong, adjusted to match that model says they have a 32% chance of winning 218 or more seats.”

Now we’re saying “Our best guess of the Democratic Party’s share of House seats after the 2018 midterms is around 215 seats. Strictly speaking, they are favored in 208 seats, but when we account for the higher number of Lean Republican districts than Democratic districts, Democrats get a slight boost and they win a House majority about 45% of the time.”

We think the latter makes more sense.

But don't worry, by spring they'll be predicting 225 House seats for the Democrats. 230 by the middle of next summer. And by the time the leaves start falling, they'll see the wave forming.

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.