Blue State Red State

Bloomberg Will Win

2005-05-09T15:24:00.000-05:00

Let's face it: Unless there's some majorly intense upheaval in New York City life between now and the election, Mayor Bloomberg will be re-elected. Yet again, this bluest of cities will have a Republican mayor-- albeit not a very red one. A few articles of note:

The Politicker: TNR (Over) Indicts

Noam Scheiber/TAPPED: Freddy Free-Fall

Village Voice: The People Vs. Bloomy

2005-04-06T14:41:00.000-05:00

Schumer On The Rise

2005-03-29T12:21:00.000-05:00

The NY Post reports (via Daily Kos) on Chuck Schumer's rise to prominence since his reelection in November. Excerpt:

In just a few months since taking a key leadership post in the Democratic Party, Sen. Charles Schumer has quietly but forcefully emerged as one of the most powerful players in national politics.

"With all eyes watching the other New York senator, Hillary Rodham Clinton, as she prepares a possible White House run in 2008, it is Schumer who has begun wielding enormous power inside Democratic ranks — raking in untold millions of dollars, making controversial decisions about who will and who won't run for Senate around the country, and even instructing colleagues in his specialty — the art of getting media attention."

The article goes on to to report that some groups are upset that Schumer is lining up anti-abortion Democrats to challenge Republicans in some states. Obviously, it would be preferable to run candidates who advocate abortion rights, but the reality is that they cannot win in some races and it's better to have a Democrat who agrees on issues other than abortion than a Republican whose disagreement only begins with abortion.

With the attention Schumer is getting, perhaps it's only a matter of time before speculation begins about his further ambitions. Afterall, these days, it's hard to be a high profile pol in NY and not be talked about for future national campaigns.

No "Culture Of Life" In Darfur

2005-03-29T12:15:00.000-05:00

The Moose asks - is the blogosphere powerful enough to stop genocide?

"Much has been made about the influence of the blogosphere on our politics. So, can the blogosphere bring its power to stop the ongoing genocide in Darfur?"

That's a tall order, but Mr. Whitman begs a very important question: In all the fervent debate over issues of life and death of late, why is so little attention paid to the genocide taking place in Darfur?

Furthermore, why do some people find it necessary for the federal government to intervene in the case of one unfortunate victim, such as Terri Schiavo, yet the pain and suffering of an entire region is not cause for action? Why can our president rush back to Washington in the middle of the night to sign something in his pajamas for a dying woman in Florida, but not focus the world's attention on the many dying in Sudan?

Shouldn't any so-called "culture of life" include those being killed for cultural and ethnic reasons?

Spitzer, Killer Of Jobs

2005-03-29T11:32:00.000-05:00

Buffalo Pundit helpfully lists (via NYCO) instances of Eliot Spitzer's job killing ways. As someone in the comments notes, "It's getting so a dishonest man can't get paid for a dishonest day's work."

By the way, Blue State Red State encourages you to visit Spitzer's website and contribute to his campaign in whatever way you are able. Get involved, make a donation, or just tell people that you support him.

You Mean Someone Was Writing All That Down?

2005-03-29T11:11:00.000-05:00

The Politcker is kind enough to share from the copy of "The Quotable Rudolph W. Giuliani," currently making the rounds amongst conservative GOPers, that they acquired. Included are such gems as:

[Giuliani] described John Kennedy as 'great and brilliant.' Barry Goldwater was an 'incompetent, confused and sometimes idiotic man.'"

Oh, and he also waited until the last minute to endorse Bob Dole in 1996 and is (or, once upon a time, was) open to supporting Democrats in elections if he views that as more beneicial to NYC. For these heinous crimes, he must be strung up!

Giuliani should not be elected President, but those are not the reasons. The possibility of a bitter and divisive dogfight within the Republican Party seems all the more likely when you read something like this.

Gothamist Turns Two

2005-02-16T09:31:00.000-05:00

Congratulations to Gothamist on two years of excellent blogging of all things NYC. The site has become a very useful way to keep abreast of various topics of interest in the city, including coverage just today of the official kick off of Mayor Bloomberg's reelection caampaign and the offering up of West Side railyards by the MTA to competitive bidding.

Strong Red State Dems

2005-02-15T09:34:00.000-05:00

Daily Kos believes it's a good sign that red state Democrats are being tapped to lead the party's opposition in the Senate. Excerpt:

I think it's becoming CW that Reid's Senate is off to a great start -- a unified, focused caucus ramping up strong, principled opposition to Bush his Republican cronies.

"Part of that newfound effectiveness may stem from the absence of those very Democrats who once backed key tenets of the Bush agenda, only to be targetted and defeated the following election cycle.

"But part of it seems to be based on Reid's deputizing of key Red State Democrats."

Previous support for Bush Administration policies by red state Dems often gave the appearance of ideological weakness. If Senators in red states can prove successful in true opposition to Bush and his Senate allies, the show of strength could help them later as they're targeted in future elections.

Secretary Lieberman?

2005-02-14T11:15:00.000-05:00

Apparently, there's renewed gossip (Washington Post; via Wonkette) that Senator Joe Lieberman is being considered to replace Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.

Inauguration Day

2005-01-20T13:11:00.000-05:00

Mr. Chief Justice, Mr. Vice President, my friends:

"You will understand and, I believe, agree with my wish that the form of this inauguration be simple and its words brief.

"We Americans of today, together with our allies, are passing through a period of supreme test. It is a test of our courage, of our resolve, of our wisdom, of our essential democracy. If we meet that test, successfully and honorably, we shall perform a service of historic importance which men and women and children will honor throughout all time. As I stand here today, having taken the solemn oath of office in the presence of my fellow countrymen, in the presence of our God, I know that it is America's purpose that we shall not fail.

"In the days and in the years that are to come we shall work for a just and honorable peace, a durable peace, as today we work and fight for total victory in war. We can and we will achieve such a peace.

"We shall strive for perfection. We shall not achieve it immediately, but we still shall strive. We may make mistakes, but they must never be mistakes which result from faintness of heart or abandonment of moral principle.

"I remember that my old schoolmaster, Dr. Peabody, said in days that seemed to us then to be secure and untroubled, things in life will not always run smoothly. Sometimes we will be rising toward the heights; then all will seem to reverse itself and start downward. The great fact to remember is that the trend of civilization itself is forever upward; that a line drawn through the middle of the peaks and the valleys of the centuries always has an upward trend.

"Our Constitution of 1787 was not a perfect instrument; it is not perfect yet. But it provided a firm base upon which all manner of men, of all races and colors and creeds, could build our solid structure of democracy.

"And so today, in this year of war, 1945, we have learned lessons, at a fearful cost, and we shall profit by them.

"We have learned that we cannot live alone, at peace; that our own well being is dependent on the well being of other nations far away. We have learned that we must live as men, not as ostriches, nor as dogs in the manger.

"We have learned to be citizens of the world, members of the human community.

"We have learned the simple truth, as Emerson said, that the only way to have a friend is to be one. We can gain no lasting peace if we approach it with suspicion and mistrust or with fear.

"We can gain it only if we proceed with the understanding, the confidence and the courage which flow from conviction.

"The almighty God has blessed our land in many ways. He has given our people stout hearts and strong arms with which to strike mighty blows for freedom and truth. He has given to our country a faith which has become the hope of all peoples in an anguished world.

"So we pray to Him now for the vision to see our way clearly; to see the way that leads to a better life for ourselves and for all our fellow men; to the achievement of His will to peace on earth."

-- Franklin Delano Roosevelt, January 20, 1945

Admitting Regrets

2005-01-20T09:54:00.000-05:00

Some outgoing members of the administration will be missed much more than others. For instance, those like Richard Armitage, who are willing to admit regrets of the last four years (via Political Animal):

'I'm disappointed that Iraq hasn't turned out better. And that we weren't able to move forward more meaningfully in the Middle East peace process.'

"Then, after a minute's pause, he adds a third regret: 'The biggest regret is that we didn't stop 9/11. And then in the wake of 9/11, instead of redoubling what is our traditional export of hope and optimism we exported our fear and our anger. And presented a very intense and angry face to the world. I regret that a lot.'"

There Is No Crisis

2005-01-19T11:14:00.000-05:00

Lots of left of center blogs have been focusing intently on President Bush's attempt to privatize Social Security. Now there's a site solely dedicated to resisting it: There Is No Crisis.

In The Running-- Kennedy, Cuomo, Green?

2005-01-19T10:55:00.000-05:00

As widely reported yesterday (in this case, by the NY Times), Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. may be considering a run for NY State Attorney General, which could pit him against his soon-to-be-former brother-in-law, Andrew Cuomo. Another big name NY Democrat that could be in the race to succeed Eliot Spitzer as he runs for Governor, is Mark Green. If all the hype about the personal anymosity between Kennedy and Cuomo is true, perhaps it is in the state's and the party's best interest that the primary end up a two man race that involves Green. Bad blood in a primary doesn't usually lead to a great general election. Mark Green might unfortunately know a little something about that from his bid to become Mayor of NYC in 2001.

You Say Potato, I Say You Suck At Farming

2005-01-19T09:58:00.000-05:00

Kevin Drum pointed out a disturbing exchange between Senator Joseph Biden and Condoleezza Rice yesterday, during her confirmation hearing (full transcript by the NY Times is here):

BIDEN: Now, how many [Iraqi forces] do you really think are trained that Allawi can look to and say, I can rely on those forces? What do you think that number is?

....RICE: We think the number right now is somewhere over 120,000.

....BIDEN: Well, I thank you for your answer. I think you'll find, if you speak to the folks on the ground, they don't think there's more than 4,000 actually trained Iraqi forces. I strongly urge you to pick up the phone or go see these folks.

Just a reminder that this is Rice's confirmation hearing to become Secretary Of State, which will make her our nation's top diplomat. Shouldn't an important part of diplomacy be knowing how many troops we've trained to realistically secure a country we're hoping to leave in something less than a shambles? Of course, maybe her idea of "trained" simply means each member of the force has been given a gun and told, "Hey, could you try not to let your country fall apart, please, because, we kinda wanna leave now."

But hey, don't forget this: Rice "began piano lessons at age 3." Thanks for clearing that up, guys. That'll sure be helpful when bin Laden and al-Zarqawi make that joint offer to leave the United States alone if our Secretary Of State can play the Rach 3... or maybe they'll just ask for "Chop Sticks." Yeah, they probably just watched Big, want an encore, and just knew Colin Powell's been haunted by fat fingers all his life. If only Powell had thinner fingers, he may have been able to play us out of this whole mess.

Florida For Dean

2005-01-18T11:11:00.000-05:00

The NY Times reports that Florida's "delegation to the Democratic National Committee has voted unanimously to endorse Howard Dean to be the party's next chairman." Excerpt:

'The only knock against Howard Dean is that he's seen as too liberal,' Mr. Maddox said. 'I'm a gun-owning pickup-truck driver and I have a bulldog named Lockjaw. I am a Southern chairman of a Southern state, and I am perfectly comfortable with Howard Dean as D.N.C. chair.'

"'What our party needs right now is energy, enthusiasm and a willingness to do things differently,' he said. 'I think Howard Dean brings all three of those things to the party.'"

Pataki Won't Challenge Clinton

2005-01-15T20:46:00.000-05:00

NY1 reports that Governor Pataki will not challenge Hilary Clinton for her Senate seat in 2006. Excerpt:

Pataki: No, you know, four years ago when Senator Clinton was running for the first time and Mayor [Rudolph] Giuliani couldn't run because of prostate cancer, a lot of people said, 'Well you should step in and run.' I just have not been someone who wants to be a legislator. I do not want to be a United States Senator. I have a job that I am very proud to have and very grateful to the people of New York because they've given me this tremendous honor of being their governor... I certainly have no expectation that I will run for the Senate in 2006 and 2008, or any time thereafter."

It's still dubious how much of an actual threat he would have posed to Clinton, but now, unless Giuliani decided to challenge her, she should easily win re-election.

NY1's Dominic Carter goes on to say that Pataki "also declared while he has had a good working relationship with potential opponent Eliot Spitzer, he's heard concerns that the state Attorney General's crackdown on Wall Street could hurt business in the state."

Even if Spitzer's completely justified, well-waged, and historic campaign against bad business practices on Wall Street is something that hurts business in the state, at least he's doing something on behalf of his constituents that doesn't involve slapping his face on a national tragedy to gain political clout.

In The Running?

2005-01-14T09:51:00.000-05:00

The NY Post gossips that "Tipper Gore is telling friends that Al is eyeing another race..." Add him to two people reportedly already eyeing the Democratic nomination four years out, John Kerry and Hilary Clinton, and you've got to wonder when someone not associated with stinging Democratic losses or scandals of the past is going to emerge. It would be really nice to have a candidate that can stand freshly on his or her own two feet without that kind of baggage. Four years may seem like a long time, but it's going to sneak up on us if we're not ready. And if we're not ready, we'll lose.

So who else is there? A few names being thrown around are Indiana Senator Evan Bayh, New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson, and Virginia Governor Mark Warner. How coincidental could it be that each of those Dems is from a red state?

Bloomberg's State Of The City

2005-01-11T23:44:00.000-05:00

Mayor Bloomberg gave his State Of The City address today. He outlined his goals to improve public safety, quality of life, and eduation and also proposed new tax breaks. He also took a shot at Washington DC on funding:

'New York is protecting the nation, not just itself, and Washington has got to do its part too,' said Bloomberg. 'New York City can't be short-changed any more. Enough.'"

City Council Speaker Gifford Miller quickly replied. Excerpt:

'We heard today about Mayor Bloomberg's version of a city of opportunity, but the reality of his record is that the mayor hasn't extended that opportunity to all New Yorkers, because the mayor's priorities aren't New York's priorities,' said the Speaker."

The campaign has now begun... well, not really. It started quite some time ago, but now the media will start paying attention.

By the way, have you heard the rumor (NY Post) that Bloomberg is thinking about running or President? Since when does the mayor of a mere metropolis think he can go to the White House? Oh, wait...

Dean Announces

2005-01-11T23:37:00.000-05:00

Governor Dean announced his candidacy for the Chairmanship of the Democratic National Committee today. Excerpt:

That word—'values'—has lately become a codeword for appeasement of the right-wing fringe. But when political calculations make us soften our opposition to bigotry, or sign on to policies that add to the burden of ordinary Americans, we have abandoned our true values."

"We cannot let that happen. And we cannot just mouth the words. Our party must speak plainly and our agenda must clearly reflect the socially progressive, fiscally responsible values that bring our party—and the vast majority of Americans—together."

"All of this will require both national perspective and local experience. I know what it's like to lead hands-on at the state level and I know what it's like to run for national office."

Kevin Drum lists some good basic arguments for Dean's candidacy. Perhaps the best is this:

He's not afraid to speak out. He'll beat up on the opposition, he'll stir the pot, and he'll say interesting things. He's also shown that he's willing to say things to Democrats that they need to hear too, whether they like it or not."

Rumsfeld Slammed Thrice

2004-12-15T16:57:00.000-05:00

First it wasChuck Hagel (via Daily Kos:

"This defense secretary went to war without enough troops. He's dismissed outside advice, he's dismissed inside advice, and he's dismissed the advice of men and women who have been in the military 25 years."

Then it was John McCain (via Bull Moose):

"U.S. Sen. John McCain said Monday that he has 'no confidence' in Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, citing Rumsfeld's handling of the war in Iraq and the failure to send more troops."

Now it's retired Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf (via Political Animal):

"I was very, very disappointed — no, let me put it stronger — I was angry by the words of the secretary of defense when he laid it all on the Army, as if he, as the secretary of defense, didn’t have anything to do with the Army and the Army was over there doing it themselves, screwing up."

Good job, Mr. Secretary.

Pennsylvania First? (And Other Notes On Primary Reform)

2004-12-15T14:09:00.000-05:00

The primary election calendar, along with election reform in general, has received a lot of attention lately from reform-minded Democrats, especially those at Daily Kos and other websites. Now Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell is looking into (Pittsburgh Post-Gazette; via Daily Kos) the possibility of making his state's Presidential primary come earlier in the cycle. Excerpt:

"Gov. Ed Rendell thinks a populous state like Pennsylvania should be more of a player when it comes to picking the Democratic and Republican presidential candidates every four years.

"So he's assembling a 13-member elections task force to study whether to move the 2008 Pennsylvania primary election up to late January or early February -- much sooner than the traditional primary in late April or mid-May."

The way we choose our candidates for President really makes little sense. Neither Iowa nor New Hampshire has much analogous relation to the nation as a whole, yet they're basically entrusted with deciding national candidates. There's no easy solution, but one thing is clear: Iowa and New Hampshire's "first in the nation" status must be taken away.

Two of the most popular plans for overhauling the primary season seem to be:

The Regional Rotating Primary Plan (proposed by the National Assocation of Secretaries of State), which would have four regional groups of states vote in four different months, with the order of the regions rotating every four years.

The California Plan which would group random states together according to number of congressional districts into ten two-week intervals, the group with the least number of districts would vote first and the group with the most would vote last.

Either plan seems vastly superior to the current arrangement.

Tenet Gets A Medal

2004-12-15T13:38:00.000-05:00

Why did President Bush present former CIA director George Tenet with a Presdiential Medal Of Freedom? According to Kevin Drum:

"The answer is obvious, isn't it? To keep him quiet. He's really a guy you'd rather have inside the tent than outside."

Don't Nuke The Filibuster

2004-12-15T13:14:00.000-05:00

The confrontation over filibusters continues (Washington Post). Excerpts:

"'If [Republicans], for whatever reason, decide to [use the 'nuclear option' to thwart filibusters], it's not only wrong, they will rue the day they did it, because we will do whatever we can do to strike back,' incoming Senate Democratic leader Harry M. Reid (Nev.) said last week. 'I know procedures around here. And I know that there will still be Senate business conducted. But I will, for lack of a better word, screw things up.'"

"Use of the nuclear option 'would make the Senate look like a banana republic . . . and cause us to try to shut it down in every way,' [NY Senator Chuck] Schumer said."

Spitzer: Reform Candidate

2004-12-15T13:06:00.000-05:00

Here are some additional remarks made by Eliot Spitzer last week after announcing his candidacy for Governor of NYS:

"When I first decided to run for Attorney General, it was because I knew the potential of the office. I suspected that there was more that could be done for the people of this state through the office, that it could be a source of creativity and fairness and opportunity.

"At the time, a mentor, Manhattan DA Robert Morgenthau, gave me simple advice: 'Surround yourself with good people. Follow the facts wherever they lead. Pursue justice without fear or favor. And the rest will take care of itself.'"

Every politician today is talking about reform, and it's very important. But reform isn't just about conference committees and consensus forecasts, it's about a government that recognizes and facilitates the strengths of the state and its people. But we're not doing that right now. Instead, it's business as usual in Albany with excessive partisanship and gridlock, with disengaged and distracted leadership. That must change."

"Two pillars, two themes, must run through our reconstruction of state government. Just as we sought accountability and responsibility in the private sector, so too we must demand it in government. Just as we sought to ensure access to opportunity in the past, so too we must do what we can to ensure access to opportunity once again. For too long, our state government has operated without either, and that must change.

"How do we do this? Well, a great New Yorker from another century, Alexander Hamilton, once said: 'Energy in the executive branch is the leading character in the definition of good government.'

"He's right. We sorely need to re-energize state government, make it smarter, more efficient, responsive, accountable and ethical. And I'm confident I'm up to that task. Anyone looking back over the last six years will see a record of steadfast determination to get things done, combined with real innovation. We've tackled complex structural problems head on and forged sweeping reforms. My pledge now is to fix what's broken in Albany, and I won't quit until the job is done."

A Consensus For Reform

2004-12-15T13:02:00.000-05:00

Over the weekend, Ed Kilgore suggested that the Clintonian New Democrats and the Dean-supporting progressives need to realize that, at heart, they're both in favor of the same thing: Reform. Now, he argues, it is important for the two groups to jointly take on the GOP. Excerpt (emphasis added):

"There is, praise Jehovah, a growing consensus among Democrats that we have to become a 'reform' party in order to properly critique the ever-growing pig-sty in Washington that the GOP is wallowing in, and also in order to build trust with an electorate that still views the Democratic Party as representing government to voters rather than the other way around."

"A common acceptance of the imperative of being a reform party is a good start. And we ought to be able to agree on a few basic reform agenda items. The DLC has suggested election reform, political reform, budget reform, and tax reform as a start, and there's no particular reason I can think of that any Democrat, regardless of ideological background, should object to that agenda."

Perhaps the DLC would prefer to leave the question of lumping Dean and MoveOn "types" together for another time?

No Real Surprise From Kerik

2004-12-15T11:51:00.000-05:00

The fact that Bernard Kerik's nomination for Secretary of Homeland Security fell apart is really no surprise. After all, he's always been a "colorful" character, to put it euphemistcally. This whole nanny story is a ridiculously ineffective cover for a personal and professional history that's meandered in and out of obviously shady territory over the years. Still, with the Bush Administration, it's hard to expect anyone much more qualified to now be nominated and at least Kerik was someone who, in theory at least, would have understood the necessity of protecting metropolitan areas. Of course, it is disheartening to discover that he never filled out a FBI questionnaire that would have allowed him, as NYC Police Commissioner, to receive "the most sensitive intelligence about the sources of the data" (NY Times) included in "classified information from the F.B.I. and the C.I.A. regarding security issues in New York."

Thompson Bows Out In NYC

2004-12-09T14:54:00.000-05:00

NYC Comptroller William Thompson Jr. has dropped out of the Mayoral race. Excerpts from NY Times (via Gothamist):

"Mr. Thompson, who at 51 is serving his first term in his current post, is young enough that many of his supporters encouraged him to wait four years, when, if Mr. Bloomberg does win re-election, the mayor's job would be open because of term limits. He would also avoid engendering any hard feelings among Hispanic voters, which could complicate a future run, by challenging the former Bronx borough president, Fernando Ferrer."

Fernando Ferrer is now presumably the front-runner for the Democratic nomination with other candidates trying to catch up; Chief among those is City Council Speaker Gifford Miller.

Empower Howard

2004-12-09T09:56:00.000-05:00

Howard Dean gave a speech on his vision for the Democratic Party. Excerpts (emphasis added):

"Our challenge today is not to re-hash what has happened, but to look forward, to make the Democratic Party a 50-state party again, and, most importantly, to win.

"To win the White House and a majority in Congress, yes. But also to do the real work that will make these victories possible -- to put Democratic ideas and Democratic candidates in every office -- whether it be Secretary of State, supervisor of elections, county commissioner or school board member."

"The most practical destination is winning elective office. And we must do that at every level of government. The way we will rebuild the Democratic Party is not from consultants down, but from the ground up."

"Now we need to build on our successes while transforming the Democratic Party into a grassroots organization that can win in 50 states."

"We cannot be a Party that seeks the presidency by running an 18-state campaign. We cannot be a party that cedes a single state, a single District, a single precinct, nor should we cede a single voter.

"As many of the candidates supported by my organization Democracy for America showed -- people in places that we've too long ignored are hungry for an alternative; they're hungry for new ideas and new candidates, and they're willing to elect Democrats."

"There are no red states or blue states, just American states. And if we can compete at all levels and in the most conservative parts of the country, we can win ... at any level and anywhere."

"If this election had been decided on moral values, Democrats would have won.

"It is time for the Democratic Party to start framing the debate.

"We have to learn to punch our way off the ropes.

"We have to set the agenda."

"Reform is the hallmark of a strong Democratic Party.

"Those who stand in the way of reform cannot be the focus of our attention for only four months out of every four years.

"Reform is a daily battle.

"And we must pursue those reforms with conviction -- every day, at all levels, in 50 states."

Howard Dean understands that the Democratic Party needs to start taking its cues not from entrenched political consultants working from fee to fee and election to election, but from the people who do the voting and run for the offices with arguably the most impact on peoples' daily lives--- city council, schoolboard, mayor, state legislature, etc. Without support, these people can't win office and eventually rise to statewide and national level. A party with no grassroots is a party with no future. Howard Dean understands this and will work to flip the party over and make progressive reform once again be what the Democratic Party is about. To support Howard Dean's bid to become chairman of the DNC, check out DraftHoward.com to sign a petition and find other ways you can get behind him.

Spitzer Announces

2004-12-07T11:51:00.000-05:00

It's official: Eliot Spitzer is running for Governor of New York:

"Almost a year ago, I said I would consider running for Governor of New York and that I would make a decision before the end of the year. I've thought about it carefully. I've consulted many people across New York. I've talked to my wife and family, and I've reached a conclusion.

"I will run for Governor of New York in 2006. I believe I can be a very good governor and I think the people of this state will be pleased by the job I do as governor.

"I start with the proposition that I'm going to fight for all New Yorkers and do my best for all the people of this state, regardless of their position or party, or color or creed.

"One of the keys to solving the problems of New York is to make state government more responsive and accountable. Right now, New York government is all about partisanship and gridlock. We're not doing the things we need to do to generate good paying jobs, safe neighborhoods and excellent schools. The system is broken. The state is facing a crisis.

"I want to fix what's broken. It's what I do best. I bring people together whether they like it or not and we tackle complex problems – not with band-aid solutions, but with major reform and real change. We did it in the financial industry and other sectors and we can do it in government. I'll bring new energy and resolve to the task of transforming state government and turning around the state economy.

"Today, I am confirming that I intend to run for governor and I have authorized my supporters outside the government to begin preparations for a campaign.

"The people of New York have been wonderfully supportive of my work so far – and I will be asking for your continued support as we move forward to 2006. The most important thing I can do during the next year is to listen. I ask for your continued feed-back through www.spitzer2006.com and as I travel around New York. Let's discuss the direction of our state and the things we can do to strengthen it.

"I believe that people who want change are a very positive and powerful force. I am depending on you and millions of New Yorkers who understand New York's history and tradition as a place of unparalleled opportunity. We believe that New York can be great. We believe that we can change things. That's what my candidacy for governor will be all about.

"Eliot"

Dem Governors Come On Strong

2004-12-07T11:30:00.000-05:00

The Washington Times reports that the Democratic Governors' Association will attempt to "reclaim" the national party by rebuilding from the state and local level. Excerpts:

"Democratic governors complained [Dec. 1st] that their party is losing elections because it is too closely tied to Washington and said they intend to play a central role in rebuilding their political base at the state level in preparation for the 2008 elections.

"Announcing that they plan to be more active and visible in the party's affairs, the chief executives said they will propose that a Democratic governor be made the chief spokesman for the Democratic National Committee, New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson said.

"'We want to become the center of gravity in our party,' said Mr. Richardson, who was elected yesterday as chairman of the Democratic Governors' Association (DGA)."

Hey, you know who was a Democratic governor? Howard Dean. You know who's been out there preaching the gospel of rebuilding the party at the grassroots to strengthen it on the national level? Howard Dean. Dean should be chairman of the DNC and it sounds like the DGA agrees, whether they realize (or want to admit) it or not.

Teens Misled About Abstinence

2004-12-07T11:03:00.000-05:00

The Washington Post reports on a report that teens are being misled by some abstinence programs. Excerpts:

"Many American youngsters participating in federally funded abstinence-only programs have been taught over the past three years that abortion can lead to sterility and suicide, that half the gay male teenagers in the United States have tested positive for the AIDS virus, and that touching a person's genitals 'can result in pregnancy,' a congressional staff analysis has found."

"Among the misconceptions cited by Waxman's investigators:

• A 43-day-old fetus is a 'thinking person.'

• HIV, the virus that causes AIDS, can be spread via sweat and tears.

• Condoms fail to prevent HIV transmission as often as 31 percent of the time in heterosexual intercourse.

"One curriculum, called 'Me, My World, My Future,' teaches that women who have an abortion 'are more prone to suicide' and that as many as 10 percent of them become sterile. This contradicts the 2001 edition of a standard obstetrics textbook that says fertility is not affected by elective abortion, the Waxman report said."

America (The Book Of The Year)

2004-12-07T10:46:00.000-05:00

AP reports (via The Regular) that America (The Book): A Citizen's Guide To Democracy Inaction by Jon Stewart and company has been named Publishers Weekly's Book of the Year. Excerpt:

"In announcing the award Monday, Publishers Weekly called the book 'a serious critique of the two-party system, the corporations that finance it and the "spineless cowards in the press" who "aggressively print allegation and rumor independent of accuracy and fairness."'"

Kerik At Homeland Security

2004-12-03T01:11:00.000-05:00

The NY Times reports on the ever-changing Cabinet, with the spotlight now mainly on revelations that former NYC Police Commissioner Bernard Kerik will be nominated to replace Tom Ridge as Secretary of Homeland Security. Just as previously suggested of Rudolph Giuliani, Kerik proved at times to be divisive during his tenure in NYC, but just as with the possibility of Giuliani filling the post, the fact that a New Yorker will now presumably be in charge of anti-terrorism preparation and funding bodes well for the city and other major metropolitan areas that have have previously received pathetic federal support for prevention and protection against terrorism. Excerpts (emphasis added):

"'If there were ever a state that deserved to have one of its citizens appointed head of homeland security it's New York,' said Senator Charles E. Schumer, a Democrat, who spoke with Mr. Kerik on Thursday night to congratulate him. 'New York should always be the focal point of homeland security activities, and Bernie Kerik is a tried and true New Yorker who understands our city, our state, our problems and our needs. We look forward to working with him to bring greater help in terms of dollars and security for New York.'

"Mr. Kerik also spoke Thursday night to Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, who issued a statement saying he knew the needs of New York and other areas at most risk of terrorist attack and could 'ensure that homeland security funds be allocated based on threat, risk and other factors recommended by the 9/11 Commission.'"

Ridge Is Out, Part 2: Giuliani

2004-12-02T15:04:00.000-05:00

The following is a response to Phil's comment on the previous post...

Agreed. Rudolph Giuliani's priorities/values as mayor were often questionable or worse and it's an unfortunate result of mass long-term memory problems that people often overlook how much he had come to be loathed by so many before September 11th made him "America's Mayor" (the way he has traded on that as political capital is, by the way, despicable). But as Phil points out, like it or not, we can't expect to get anyone near ideal under this administration. Giuliani easily rises to the top of the list of potential candidates in terms of desirability once all the politically impossible (meaning non-Republican) candidates are ruled out. And he easily makes much more sense than Ridge ever did simply for the fact that, as mayor of NYC, Giuliani had first hand experience with leading a big bureaucracy involving various arms of law enforcement, transportation, etc. in a target area. The main advantage of a NYer for this post, though, is that he'll be more likely to put the money and resources where it's actually needed as opposed to continuing the ridiculous ways of allocation since the department was created.

Ridge Is Out

2004-11-30T14:39:00.000-05:00

Secretary Tom Ridge is announcing (NY Times) his departure from the Department of Homeland Security today, which means there will be another round of guessing who will be appointed to the Cabinet. As obnoxious as his partisan sniping was during the campaign, Rudolph Giuliani is someone with experience squeezing results out of bureaucracy and, while much of his tenure as Mayor of New York was more than a little divisive, the Homeland Security post would admittedly play to his strengths. Plus there's the added benefit for NYC that Giuliani would probably be more likely to push for proper anti-terrorism funding for the city--- something that has yet to happen since September 11, 2001 under the Cabinet of Bush's first term. While this is probably a longshot, it would put the Mayor back into public service and could theoretically help him in potential runs for Governor or Senator.

Edwards' Farewell

2004-11-30T14:30:00.000-05:00

The Boston Globe reports on John Edwards' Senate farewell tour in North Carolina. Excerpt:

"'The battle I'm fighting is about building one country. It's not about blue states or red states.'

Edwards suggested that Democrats did not do enough in the 2004 election to tout their religious beliefs.

'The voters did not know where we stood and what we believed in,' he said. 'The American people need to know we are going to keep this country safe.'"

Bigotry And The Arch-Right

2004-11-19T09:50:00.000-05:00

Peter Beinart's TNR article offers an excellent view on the hypocrisy of conservative evangelicals' current claims of supposed anti-Christrian bigotry by the left and how it is an attempt at debate-stifling self-victimization. Excerpts with emphasis added:

"One of the things that galled the right during the 'political correctness' wars was the way leftists casually threw around terms like 'racist' and 'bigot.' For conservatives, some of whom knew firsthand how much harm those accusations could cause, it became axiomatic that such pejoratives should be reserved for only the most egregious, clear-cut examples of racial or ethnic animus."

"That's how it seemed, anyhow. In recent weeks, prominent conservatives have been anything but scrupulous in charging Democrats with bigotry against people of faith. Just before the election, Christian Right leader James Dobson called Democratic Senator Patrick Leahy a 'God's people hater.' On November 8, talk-show host Joe Scarborough condemned 'Democrats who take solace in their bigoted anti-Christian screeds.' Right-wing pundit Michelle Malkin recently blurbed a book titled Persecution: How Liberals are Waging War Against Christianity, noting that 'Persecution exposes the hypocrisy and bigotry of the secular, anti-Christian Left.' And, last Sunday, Mary Matalin chimed in on 'Meet the Press,' claiming that 'people of faith, in the election process, they have been demonized and they have been treated with disdain and contempt.' Imagine if James Carville, who was seated next to her on the show, had made the same claim about African Americans (who, although they are one of the most religious groups in America, vote Democratic, and thus don't fall under Matalin's 'people of faith' rubric). Within 15 minutes, the conservative blogosphere would have accused him of politically correct demagoguery."

"But, most of the time, what conservatives call anti-evangelical bigotry is simply harsh criticism of the Christian Right's agenda. Scarborough seized on a recent column by Maureen Dowd, which accused President Bush of 'replacing science with religion, and facts with faith,' leading America into 'another dark age.' The Weekly Standard recently pilloried Thomas Friedman for criticizing 'Christian fundamentalists' who 'promote divisions and intolerance at home and abroad,' and Howell Raines, for saying the Christian Right wants to enact 'theologically based cultural norms.'

"This isn't bigotry. What these (and most other) liberals are saying is that the Christian Right sees politics through the prism of theology, and there's something dangerous in that. And they're right. It's fine if religion influences your moral values. But, when you make public arguments, you have to ground them--as much as possible--in reason and evidence, things that are accessible to people of different religions, or no religion at all. Otherwise, you can't persuade other people, and they can't persuade you. In a diverse democracy, there must be a common political language, and that language can't be theological."

"Identity politics is a powerful thing--a way of short-circuiting debate by claiming that your views aren't merely views; they are an integral part of who you are. And who you are must be respected. But harsh criticism is not disrespect--and to claim it is undermines democratic debate by denying opponents the right to aggressively, even impolitely, disagree. That is what conservatives are doing when they accuse liberals of religious bigotry merely for demanding that the Christian Right defend their viewpoints with facts, not faith. Once upon a time, conservatives knew better. I hope some still do."

New Donkey applies this to his ongoing argument against the idea that the only two choices for Dems are to "move right or move on," pointing out that "respect does not mean submission." Excerpt:

"I'll go Beinert one better: the Christian Right's effort to make 'respect' equal 'agreement' is even more deeply disrespectful to people who actually share their religion. I'm a Protestant Christian myself, and read the same Bible that James Dobson reads, and I see no evidence at all that the message (much less the primary message) of Scripture to the faithful of this time is to outlaw abortion and stigmatize gay people. So it really offends me to be told I'm an 'anti-Christian bigot' for disagreeing with the Christian Right on such subjects.

"It behooves Democrats to challenge Christian conservatives for playing identity politics and refusing to engage in civil discourse about the intersection of faith and policy, and to challenge themselves to reject the false choice of disrespect or submission."

Republicans have often accused Democrats of attempting to incite class warfare with claims such as John Edwards' that there are "two Americas," one for the privileged with all the perks available from our society, and one for the working and middle classes struggling to pay the bills. The real class warfare today, however, is being waged by the ultra-conservative evangelical right and the arsenal is made up of false claims of anti-Christian bigotry against anyone who disagrees with them. There is no disrepect inherent in disagreement and to claim otherwise goes against the fundamental principles of a society whose government was founded on open debate of the issues affecting it.

The ultra-conservative evangelical right continues to hold on to the selfish belief that they are the only legitimate Christians. To claim that the left is bigoted against Christians is to claim that it is largely bigoted against itself.

The Young Get Older

2004-11-17T16:13:00.000-05:00

Noam Scheiber has an interesting way of putting this:

"...The broader point I'd make is that Democrats' cultural problem with seniors is taking care of itself pretty quickly, and without us having to do much about it. (Everything we know about gay marriage suggests that the earlier you were born, the more likely you are to oppose it. So it's only a matter of time before...) If you only have a serious problem with one group on culture issues per se, and that group is dying off pretty quickly, it doesn't make a ton of sense to think in strictly cultural terms about what you do going forward."

On one level this argument, morbid as it perhaps may be, and others similar to it make a lot of common sense. However, at the same time, who's to know how long it will take for a progressive shift in the demographic group's opinion to take hold, assuming that it will?

10 Truths

2004-11-17T10:21:00.000-05:00

Beliefnet's Steve Waldman attempts (via Political Animal) to point out ten truths about liberals and conservatives. For the most part, he makes some very astute observations. Excerpts:

"The idea that [the re-election of Bush] was a victory for people who care about morality over those who don’t is galling to liberals because, for many of them, the number one issue in this election was Iraq -- and their opposition to the incumbent administration was almost entirely grounded in moral concerns."

"Liberals can’t mock religious people as dumb when they disagree with them but hail their wisdom when they're liberals like Jimmy Carter. This intellectual snobbery is a major reason why religious conservatives distrust liberal elites."

"When Democrats hear conservatives accuse them of being anti-religion it sounds like what they’re really saying is that Democrats don't practice the right kind of religion -- that they are, as my talk radio friend put it, 'a bunch of phonies.' This is a direct attack on the nature of liberals’ relationship with God or spirituality."

"Yes, religious conservatives want a greater role in public life -- perhaps more than liberals want or the Constitution allows -- but President Bush's faith based initiative is highly pluralistic and he has spoken out for religious tolerance. Equating him or his supporters with regimes that execute dissidents or blow up buildings is heinous."

While the true plurality of Bush's faith based initiative is more questionable than Waldman lets on, the important point here is that, while the President's policies and actions may be highly questionable, they are far from the moral lows of Osama bin Laden, the Taliban, Saddam Hussein, and other tyrants and regimes of the sort to which he and his administration are often compared by the harshest of critics. Likenings such as those offer an easy, hyperbolic shorthand explanation of dislike, but are far from reality and don't really serve to further any attempt at a constructive criticisim.

"Liberals believe that historically red state conservatives were on the wrong side of the civil rights struggle (first as conservative Democrats and then as Republicans) and that they opposed much of the campaign for equal rights for women... So when conservatives oppose gay rights, liberals see history repeating itself."

"Liberals sometimes claim that the anti-abortion movement is actually a religious movement aspiring to impose a particular theology. In fact, the anti-abortion side has tended in recent years to make secular arguments."

"Most liberals (and many conservatives) fret about the separation of church and state because they want to protect the free expression of religious views."

"[Conservatives] may have the numbers but they nonetheless feel powerless against a popular culture that doesn't seem to share their values, and in the face of aggressive judges who impose their will over the objections of state legislatures."

Perhaps this explains how conservatives feel, but it still doesn't offer a rationale for why. Conservatives often argue that they're bombarded by the left through television and other media. Even if that were true, it's easy enough to change the channel or turn the television off. No one is forcing people to watch or listen to anything. If this were really such a popular concern, conservatives would easily be able to do something about it because their party is currently in control of the federal government, as well as many state governments.

As for "agressive judges" -- sounds an awful lot like "activist judges" and, if not for so-called activist judges, blacks might not be allowed to go to school with or use the same facilities as whites. Judges are supposed to be insulated from public opinion so that public opinion doesn't influence what they believe to be fair judgements and, when they do their jobs correctly, they help advance society whether society is ready for it or not.

"Telling someone they are against "family values" is not far from telling them they’re bad parents. Most liberal parents (like most conservatives) spend most of their days thinking not about politics but about how to raise good kids."

"[Conservatives] believe that in condoning legalized abortion or gay unions or even out of wedlock heterosexual sex, America is messing with morality as outlined in the Bible and so attacking God. As anyone who takes the Old Testament seriously knows, the consequences of that could not be more enormous."

Again, this seems like an explanation of how conservatives feel, but not why. Isn't it a little like wanting to have your cake and eat it too to, on one hand, claim that your reasons against something are secular then claim the relevance of your argument is basically that God's wrath will strike our civilization down if we condone the opposite view?

Overall, the article is well worth the read.

Different Priorities, Part 2

2004-11-16T13:22:00.000-05:00

In his comments on a previous post, Phil brought up some points worth looking at:

"I wonder, if the GOP is so attuned to their base's adherence to spiritual guidelines over material gain..."

If by "base," Phil means evangelicals and/or the very socially conservative, there is definitely a strong argument that the GOP, as currently led by Karl Rove, is not actually attuned to their "spiritual guidelines over material gain." However, that base is being pandered to. The difference is a lack of sincere empathy.

"Also, if the GOP values... 'moral values' over materialism, why oppose the establishment of a new popular Islamic state in Iraq?"

This is an interesting question. Two possible answers: First, it is not in the interest of our national security for Iraq to become a fundamentalist Islamic state and it would totally go against the Bush Administration's claims that democracy can and will take root there; Second, the values of the extremist evangelical right are, simply, selfish. Whoever does not worship in the same way they worship is not seen as an equal. Therefore, they believe it is fine for Christianity, more specifically their version of it, to be intertwined with government, but no other religion deserves the same partnership.

That said, it is important to clarify at this point that this particular problem is not necessarily with the GOP as a whole, but with the extremist element that is currently claiming false supremacy over it and false moral superiority over anyone who disagrees with them (namely, the Democratic Party).

"[Brad Carson, defeated Democratic candidate from Oklahoma,] says that, 'while the [Senate] defeat was all my own, the failure was of the party to which I swear allegiance, which uncritically embraces a modernity that so many others reject.'

"This argument seems rather obtuse in that it doesn't account for the fact that this 'modernity' involves a system of moral values that are held just as fervently by the left as 'traditional' values are by the [right]. We value, among other things, civil rights and the seperation of church and state. In order to accept a ban on gay marriage, we would have to abandon these values. This doesn't seem to matter to Carson, who wants to give weight only to the ethical convictions of the right."

Phil is absolutely correct that we cannot accept a ban on gay marriage because that would mean the abandonment of Democratic values, but there is no reason for either. The issue, as Carson frames it, is not whether gay marriage should be allowed or not, but whether spirituality is as important as material gain. The approach of Democrats has been to try and win right-leaning moderates on economic issues, while often simultaneously ignoring differences on, or even deriding them for, cultural views. Unfortunately, there often seems to be a tendency with many on the left to assume the reason for their differences with the right comes down to a lack of knowledge and education-- basically, a charge of ignorance. Democrats will never win elections by claiming the very voters they need to win over are ignorant.

The party needs to accept that some of the people they're trying to win on economic issues aren't voting by their pocketbooks, but by their so-called 'moral values.' Moderates are moderate because they can be reasoned with, so reason with them in the context of those very values that they hold dear; after all, the things they value are family and life and those are what we value, too. The goal is to convince them that our pursuit of those values does not negate theirs.

Obviously this is easier said than done, but no progress can come without first knowing where to start. And, yes, there's a good deal of optimistic idealism involved, but that's what values are about.

As for the arch-right evangelical extremists, there's really no reasoning with them and they're a minority, anyway, even if they are a loud one. So, let them yell and overreach and see where it's got them once they've alienated themselves from the true base of their party, the rational moderates.

The Old One-Two-(Three)

2004-11-16T09:56:00.000-05:00

With his three most recent posts, Bull Moose is on a roll with some excellent observations. First, a call for awareness of the power the President is attempting to consolidate:

"The Moose warns Democrats that this Administration will not rest on its laurels. The White House is moving at lightning speed in consolidating its victory of two weeks ago. While some Democrats continue to ruminate over whether the Diebold machines robbed them of an Ohio victory, President Bush is cleaning house, announcing domestic policy initiatives and launching an offensive in Iraq. Even critics such as the Moose have to recognize that W. has a new confidence in his speech and overall demeanor.

"It appears that the donkey won't have the luxury of governance by a lame duck for quite a while. The most striking aspect of this new Republican agenda is to cast the GOP as the reform party.

"Democrats should realize that given this emboldened Bush Administration, there is no longer any time for introspection. The donkey must quickly repair to the laboratory and devise his own reform agenda. As the Moose has indicated before, Democrats must now become the insurgent party that offers bold reform solutions to shake up the government. Reactive politics will be insufficient.

"Time is of the essence for it is clear that the Republicans intend to strike quickly and boldly."

Next, he offers the words of John McCain, from the 2000 primary campaign on which he worked, which seem strikingly relevant today:

"I recognize and celebrate that our country is founded upon Judeo-Christian values. And I have pledged my life to defend America and all her values, the values that have made us the noblest experiment in history.

"But political intolerance by any political party is neither a Judeo-Christian nor an American value. The political tactics of division and slander are not our values.

"They are corrupting influences on religion and politics and those who practice them in the name of religion or in the name of the Republican Party or in the name of America shame our faith, our party and our country."

And in the most recent post, some biting words for Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld:

"The Moose observes that, in the Bush Administration, accountability only applies to low income welfare mothers and certainly not to high-ranking Pentagon officials.

"How else to explain Donald Rumsfeld's survival amidst the mass cabinet purge? Iraq continues to spiral out of control and the legacy of Abu Ghraib stains America's image, but Rumsfeld is held harmless. Rumsfeld's arrogant refusal to heed warnings about the need for more troops in Iraq and his aversion to nation building has resulted in America paying a heavy price in blood and treasure.

"Yet, it is Powell who has evidently been shown the door - so much for the culture of responsibility. Leave no incompetent Secretary of Defense behind."

What's Next?

2004-11-16T01:46:00.000-05:00

Political Animal's Kevin Drum wonders if the current problem with the Democratic Party stems at least partially from a decades-old agenda that, in many respects, has been mostly, yet not completely, accomplished. He outlines the main goals of the agenda as 1) "equal rights," 2) "economic security," 3) "personal liberties," and 4) "corporate predation." Excerpts:

"Make no mistake: there's plenty of progress yet to be made on all these scores. Black poverty remains a national scandal, the current minimum wage would be shameful in a country half as wealthy as ours, and we still have a long battle for gay rights ahead of us.

"But I suspect that most people, maybe even most liberals, would say we've accomplished 80% of what we set out to do back in the 30s and 60s. Maybe even 90%. In terms of genuinely big programs, the only one left is national healthcare — and that's just not enough to hang our hats on."

"If we've accomplished most of what we set out to do all those decades ago, what's next? Finishing off the final 10%? Fighting a war of attrition against relentless Republican dagger thrusts? It's true that those things need to be done — and I'm not trying to denigrate their importance — but they just aren't compelling enough to win elections for us. We need new goals."

Schumer To Stay in Senate

2004-11-16T01:27:00.000-05:00

The NY Times reports that Senator Chuck Schumer, who just won a landslide re-election, has decided not to make a run for Governor of New York in 2006. Excerpt:

"'For me, it was not a hard decision,' he said, about choosing to continue in the Senate rather than making a run for governor. 'For the last few months, I have said repeatedly that the only thing on my radar screen is being a good senator and delivering for New York. Many were skeptical. But I've been a legislator for 30 years. It is what I know how to do and what I love to do.'''

Definitely a good development for Democrats in New York, which currently looks to be a potential hotbed of political activity in upcoming election cycles, this will spare the party the possibility of a brutal gubernatorial primary between Schumer and New York State Attorney General Eliot Spitzer. Spitzer will now likely win the nomination handily, avoiding most intra-party scrapes that could weaken him against a Republican rival in the general election. And with rumors of three-term Republican Governor George Pataki possibly challenging Senator Hillary Clinton for her seat in 2006, the likelihood of Rudy Giuliani making a run for Albany would seem to increase at least for the simple reason that there's no other NY Republican who can challenge Spitzer.

Control

2004-11-16T01:04:00.000-05:00

Joshua Micah Marshall makes a good point, observing the real post re-election move for Bush, so far, is neither to the center nor right, but to a level of greater personal control. Excerpt:

"Neither [soon-to-be Secretary of State nominee, Condoleezza] Rice nor [Attorney General nominee, Alberto] Gonzales are the neo-cons' or the conservatives' choice for their respective offices-to-be. In each case they're acceptable; but no more.

"What distinguishes each is their connection to the president, their loyalty and their fealty. Neither has any base in the city or standing anywhere else absent their connection to him. And in appointing them he has placed the State Department and the Justice Department under his direct and unmediated control as surely as the various members of the White House staff already are."

New Blood Needed

2004-11-16T00:20:00.000-05:00

Over at Talking Points Memo, Joshua Micah Marshall has called out Democratic consultants. Excerpts:

are

And while he doesn't buy into claims that the party needs to reinvent itself, he does seem to argue that a degree of change is necessary in which a balance can be achieved which allows Democrats to gain new votes in red states without losing votes in the blue:

Powell Bows Out

2004-11-15T23:42:00.000-05:00

Just in case you somehow found your way here without already learning this: Colin Powell resigned today from the State Department Also resigning: Agriculture Secretary Ann Veneman, Education Secretary Rod Paige, and Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham. So there goes the moderate voice of the administration. As little as his advice was heeded over the last four years, it was at least good to know that his post was not filled by someone less level-headed.

Different Priorities

2004-11-12T11:05:00.000-05:00

Brad Carson, defeated Democratic Senate candidate from Oklahoma, has an article in The New Republic (via New Donkey) explaining what he thinks to be the cultural problem his party really needs to confront:

"For the vast majority of Oklahomans--and, I would suspect, voters in other red states--these transcendent cultural concerns are more important than universal health care or raising the minimum wage or preserving farm subsidies. Pace Thomas Frank [author of What's the Matter with Kansas?: How Conservatives Won the Heart of America], the voters aren't deluded or uneducated. They simply reject the notion that material concerns are more real than spiritual or cultural ones. The political left has always had a hard time understanding this, preferring to believe that the masses are enthralled by a 'false consciousness' or Fox News or whatever today's excuse might be. But the truth is quite simple: Most voters in a state like Oklahoma--and I venture to say most other Southern and Midwestern states--reject the general direction of American culture and celebrate the political party that promises to reform or revise it."

Basically, don't automatically assume voters are ignorant because their priorities are different. Try to understand why they're different. This is not a call for pandering or insincerely claiming to share the same priorities. Be aware of differences and respect them, even while supporting your own views. It's always easier to either win someone over or get past differences when there's a mutual respect, but no mutual respect will come from one party's condescension toward the other. Also, agreement on every specific issue or set of issues is not necessary for general cooporation.

Congrats, Mr. President

2004-11-11T14:37:00.000-05:00

Excerpts from a congratulatory letter to President George W. Bush from Dr. Bob Jones III (via Politcal Animal):

"The media tells us that you have received the largest number of popular votes of any president in America's history. Congratulations!"

The media also tells us, perhaps less frequently, that John Kerry received the second largest number of popular votes in America's history.

"In your re-election, God has graciously granted America—though she doesn't deserve it—a reprieve from the agenda of paganism.

Who's agenda of paganism? Bush has been President for four years and Republicans have controlled the House and Senate for two. Therefore, hasn't the agenda been theirs? Not that I've seen any worshipping of sun gods on C-Span of late. The main agenda of the last few years has been cutting taxes and fighting a war in Iraq. It's surprising for an ultra-conservative to label this pagan.

"You have been given a mandate."

Mandate? Bush won by the narrowest margin of any President in more than three quarters of a century.

The Third Way

2004-11-11T13:59:00.000-05:00

The Washington Post reports the creation of a new progressive policy group. Excerpt:

"As Democrats continue to stagger from last week's election losses, a group of veteran political and policy operatives has started an advocacy group aimed at using moderate Senate Democrats as the front line in a campaign to give the party a more centrist profile.

"Third Way is the latest in a series of organizations aimed at rescuing Democrats from the perception that they have lost touch with middle-class voters, particularly in the heartland states that voted overwhelmingly for President Bush over Sen. John F. Kerry.

"The group, which has enlisted the support of several senators from Bush-backing 'red states,' hopes to rebut the notion that Democrats represent an outdated brand of liberalism by producing new policy proposals designed to create a 'moderate majority,' said Matt Bennett, Third Way's communications director."

The Bush Legacy

2004-11-11T13:52:00.000-05:00

Bull Moose has some thoughts on Bush's possible legacy. Excerpt:

"In short, Bush could become a Reagan-like conqueror of an evil empire or he could become another Texan leaving with the nation mired in a foreign mess. The Moose is soft on LBJ - at least that Texan had a progressive, even heroic, domestic legacy. Whatever happens in the war, W. will never be able to say that."

Bush Hurt Moderates' Chances For 2008

2004-11-11T11:00:00.001-05:00

As featured in this NY Times article Arthur Finkelstein, a GOP consultant known for his work with Alfonse D'Amato, Jesse Helms, Ariel Sharon, and George Pataki, believes that President Bush's strategy of relying on evangelical voters to win re-election will ultimately hinder the prospects of moderate Republicans, including Pataki. Excerpt:

"'Bush courted the evangelical vote,' [Finklestein] said, 'and turned these elections, in fact, into a referendum on the religious and cultural nature of America. This is my problem.'

"As a result, he said, 'it will be difficult for Pataki.'

"'Bush's victory strengthens the ability of the Christian right to nominate the next Republican nominee as much as the last one,' Mr. Finkelstein said."

While it may be, and probably is, true that Bush's elevation of the evangelicals to the decisive factor in his re-election will cut off moderates from the GOP nomination in 2008, it must also be pointed out that what's even more likely to hurt Pataki's chance are his ineffectiveness as Governor and the thrashing he will probably receive either in the primaries from Rudolph Giuliani (if he decides to run) or in the general election from Hilary Clinton if and when he attempts to challenge the latter for her Senate seat. Also, he's terribly dull-- not a good trait for a potential Presidential candidate.

Gonzales For AG

2004-11-10T14:33:00.000-05:00

Reuters is reporting that Bush plans to nominate Alberto Gonzales to replace departing John Ashcroft as Attorney General. As Bush's White House legal counsel, Gonzales has supported and defended detaining suspected terrorists indefinitely wihout trial and even wrote a memo claiming the Bush administration could ignore the protection of prisoners of war as provided in anti-torture laws and treaties. Basically, there's a good chance he's at least partially responsible for what happened at Abu Ghraib, but we can't know for sure because information about that hasn't been made very available to members of either party who were outraged at the scandal.

This looks like as good a time as any for Dems to begin uniting with rational, moderate Republicans against an obvious afront to ideals of universal civil and human rights.

Marginalize The Arch-Right

2004-11-10T11:09:00.000-05:00

As opined before, there is likely much less that divides the moderates of both sides than we're being led to believe by the currently triumphant, overpoweringly loud Arch-Right and the lazy, parroting mainstream media. The extremist left is already more or less a marginalized faction and the weak-kneed centrist mirroring of the GOP is hopefully, and seemingly, behind us. It's looking more like the trend for the Dems will be a progressivism that, instead of imitating or rolling over to the GOP, will be willing to include those who share the same ideals the far right currently seems to think it has no obligation to the moderates it parades before the public to honor. As Bull Moose puts it:

"In 2008, these folks aren't about to settle for a candidate who doesn't pass their litmus test. It is fine with the right-wing to showcase the moderates at the convention. It is entirely another thing to make one of them the leader of their party. Heck, they don't even want a mod to chair the Senate Judiciary Committee much less to occupy the Oval Office. At this point, it's more likely that John Ashcroft will be the ACLU Man of the Year than the Republicans will nominate a sensible moderate in '08. After all, God is on their side.

"Smart Democrats will make alliances with moderate Republicans. In '06 and '08, they will need their votes. And who knows, the donkey might even want one of them on their ticket in the next Presidential campaign."

The Arch-Right needs to experience the same marginalization the far left already has and the best way to accomplish this is for Dems to appeal to moderate Republicans to form a progressive coalition.

GOP: A Party Of Extremes?

2004-11-10T10:48:00.000-05:00

Matt Welch offers an observation (via Politcal Animal) that one of the major differences between the Rupublican and Democratic parties today is that the extreme left is not allowed to weild as much power over the Dems as the extreme right is allowed over the GOP. Excerpt:

"The main point is not to compare competing fringes, but mostly to point out that the Republicans' extremist fringe includes powerful senior elected politicians from their own party. Moore, for all his sitting-next-to-people action at the DNC, was not invited on the podium. Rick Santorum, the senator from Pennsylvania who has described outlawing gay marriage as 'the ultimate Homeland security,' gave a rousing speech to the Republicans. Tom Coburn, the new Republican Senator from Oklahoma, has advocated the death penalty for abortion doctors, and held up Fidel Castro's forced AIDS camps as a model worth emulating. Jim DeMint, your new Senator from South Carolina, thinks that single pregnant women shouldn't teach in public schools. If Bush wanted to deliver a 'Sister Souljah moment,' embracing cross-over moderation at the expense of his own party's fringe, he wouldn't need to take a swipe at a non-politician like Ann Coulter -- he could start in the august hall of the Unites States Senate.

"So finally answering Jarvis' question: Did Michael Moore cost Kerry the election? Answer: Maybe! (I think it's impossible to ascribe one reason to a complicated election.) But if it's true, it's only because the people who voted that way didn't know or didn't care that Moore's influence over the Democratic Party pales in comparison to Republican extremists' over the Republicans."

More Victorious Whining From The Arch-Right

2004-11-09T13:10:00.000-05:00

As mentioned before, there seems to be an inclination on the part of the religious and social right to simultaneously claim victory and oppression by the left. Interestingly, the majority of those left of center (meaning moderates and progressives)-- the ones that lost-- seem to be be preaching outreach and understanding, while those on the far right-- the loudest of those who won-- can only spew hatred. This reprehensible essay (via Wonkette) proposes an explusion of the "blue states" from the Union, while speaking out against Lincoln (the first Republican President) for his refusal to let the southern states secede. Excerpts:

"For many decades, conservative citizens and like-minded political leaders (starting with President Calvin Coolidge) have been denigrated by the vilest of lies and characterizations from hordes of liberals who now won't even admit that they are liberals--because the word connotes such moral stink and political silliness. As a class, liberals no longer are merely the vigorous opponents of the Right; they are spiteful enemies of civilization's core decency and traditions."

"When they tire of showering conservative victims with ideological mud, liberals promote the only other subjects with which they feel conversationally comfortable: Obscenity and sexual perversion. It's as if the genes of liberals have rendered them immune to all forms of filth.

"As a final insult, liberal lawyers and judges have become locusts of the Left, conspiring to destroy democracy itself by excreting statutes and courtroom tactics that fertilize electoral fraud and sprout fields of vandals who will cast undeserved and copious ballots on Election Day."

"That is why the unthinkable must become thinkable. If the so-called 'Red States' (those that voted for George W. Bush) cannot be respected or at least tolerated by the 'Blue States' (those that voted for Al Gore and John Kerry), then the most disparate of them must live apart-- not by secession of the former (a majority), but by expulsion of the latter."

"The demographics revealed by the two most recent presidential elections are radically different and have resulted in "Two Americas" (but not the simplistic "Two Americas" [one rich, one poor] envisioned by Kerry's Marxist-tongued running mate, John Edwards):

"BUSH USA is predominantly white; devoutly Christian (mostly Protestant); openly, vigorously heterosexual; an open land of single-family homes and ranches; economically sound (except for a few farms), but not drunk with cyberworld business development, and mainly English-speaking, with a predilection for respectfully uttering 'yes, ma'am' and 'yes, sir.'

"GORE/KERRY USA is ethnically diverse; multi-religious, irreligious or nastily antireligious; more sexually liberated (if not in actual practice, certainly in attitude); awash with condo canyons and other high-end real estate bordered by sprawling, squalid public housing or neglected private homes, decidedly short of middle-class neighborhoods; both high tech and oddly primitive in its commerce; very artsy, and Babelesque, with abnormally loud speakers."

The Curse Of The Second Term

2004-11-09T11:50:00.000-05:00

Clinton's second term saw the Lewinsky scandal. Reagan's second saw the breaking of the Iran-Contra Affair. And, of course, Nixon's saw Watergate. The supposed "second-term curse" currently has some Democrats hopeful and some Republicans anxious, and with good reason as the Washington Post reports. Excerpts:

"There are certainly plenty of thorny matters awaiting resolution: the probe into the leak of a CIA operative's employment; reports and lawsuits stemming from the abuse of prisoners at Abu Ghraib; probes into prewar intelligence in Iraq and the White House's use of it; and FBI investigations into how sensitive intelligence wound up in the hands of Israelis and Iranians.

"Even the chief investigator faces investigation. The Justice Department's Public Integrity Section is examining whether Attorney General John D. Ashcroft, when he served in the Senate, violated criminal campaign funding laws or federal disclosure laws relating to the transfer of a mailing list to his campaign committee.

"Halliburton gets the prize for being the first to reassert itself since the election. Its SEC filing Friday disclosed more trouble related to investigations by the SEC, Justice, a French magistrate and Nigerian officials into whether a consortium including Halliburton paid $180 million in bribes to Nigerian officials involving a gas plant from 1995 to 2002. Cheney ran the company from 1995 to 2000, and Halliburton bought the unit involved in the consortium in 1998.

"That followed by little more than a week the last bad news about Halliburton: that the FBI expanded a probe into charges of contract irregularities by Halliburton in Iraq and Kuwait. Lawyers for a Pentagon official said the FBI requested an interview with her over her complaints that the Army gave a Halliburton unit preferential treatment when granting it a $7 billion contract to restore Iraq's oil fields."

Bush is only the fourth President since Eisenhower to win a second term. So far, the curse is going strong at 3 for 3. Think Bush can make it 4 for 4?

Dean For DNC Chair?

2004-11-09T11:30:00.000-05:00

There's been a lot of wishful thinking of late for Howard Dean to become chairman of the DNC, and according to an Associated Press report ( linked here in the NY Post), he may be willing to oblige. Excerpts:

"'He told me he was thinking about it,' said Steve Grossman, a former chairman of the Democratic National Committee. Grossman said he 'strongly urged' Dean to go for the job."

"But Dean has refused to rule out another run for the Oval Office — which would probably be impossible if he headed the DNC."

Current DNC chairman, Terry McAuliffe, is well-known for his fundraising skills, but in his nearly four years as chair, he has been much less successful in rallying the party around ideas. Dean, along with Joe Trippi, taught Democrats new ways of fundraising and getting people involved, while simultaneously conveying progressive ideals that the DNC needs to begin taking to heart.

Senator Bush?

2004-11-09T11:14:00.000-05:00

The South Florida Sun-Sentinal reports on how the retirement of Florida Sen. Bob Graham has left Sen. Bill Nelson in a precarious position. Excerpts:

"As the lone Florida Democrat holding statewide office, Nelson is wearing a huge target on his back.

"Republicans, emboldened by Election Day victories across the South, are already seeing Nelson's seat as one they could put in GOP control in 2006."

"With that enthusiasm building for 2006, many Republicans would like to see Gov. Jeb Bush, who must step down as governor in two years because of constitutionally mandated term limits, run for the Senate. Such a move could keep him in the national political limelight and in reach of a run for the White House to extend the Bush family dynasty in the Oval Office."

Bush says he's interested in neither the Senate nor White House, but that doesn't keep anyone from throwing his name around.

Kerry On

2004-11-09T10:54:00.000-05:00

The Washington Post reports John Kerry will not follow in Al Gore's footsteps and disappear from the scene after his loss to George W. Bush. Excerpts:

"Democrat John F. Kerry plans to use his Senate seat and long lists of supporters to remain a major voice in American politics despite losing the presidential race last Tuesday, and he is assessing the feasibility of trying again in 2008, friends and aides said yesterday."

"Several Democrats expressed skepticism about Kerry's plans, saying they believe the party needs a fresh face and must turn a corner. One well-known Democratic operative who worked with the Kerry campaign said opposition to Bush, not excitement about Kerry, was behind the senator's fundraising success. 'If he thinks he's going to capitalize on that going forward, he's in for a surprise,' said the operative, who spoke on the condition of anonymity."

"The senator from Massachusetts is also contemplating establishing a political action committee and perhaps a think tank to elevate his role during the jockeying over the definition and leadership of the Democratic Party."

The facts are that, no matter what motivated people to vote for Kerry, he was the Democratic nominee, thus de facto leader of the party for the better part of a year, and close to half of voters were willing to support him at the polls.

And he is still a US Senator.

With the party in need of leadership and a clear sense of direction, it would not only be silly, but also irresponsible, of him to not try to make use of the politcal capital he acquired during his run.

Who's Really Elitist?

2004-11-08T11:30:00.000-05:00

The LA Times' Michael Kinsely offers an excellent, and humoroursly apologetic, opinion (via Political Animal; free registration required) of where supposed red-staters and blue-staters now stand. Excerpts:

"Look at it this way. (If you don't mind, that is.) It's true that people on my side of the divide want to live in a society where women are free to choose and where gay relationships have civil equality with straight ones. And you want to live in a society where the opposite is true. These are some of those conflicting values everyone is talking about. But at least my values — as deplorable as I'm sure they are — don't involve any direct imposition on you. We don't want to force you to have an abortion or to marry someone of the same sex, whereas you do want to close out those possibilities for us. Which is more arrogant?

"We on my side of the great divide don't, for the most part, believe that our values are direct orders from God. We don't claim that they are immutable and beyond argument. We are, if anything, crippled by reason and open-mindedness, by a desire to persuade rather than insist. Which philosophy is more elitist? Which is more contemptuous of people who disagree?"

"Be fair! (A liberal whine, I know. Sorry.) Conservatives shouldn't assert the prerogatives of victory and then claim the compensations of defeat as well. You can't oppress us and simultaneously complain that we are oppressing you."

The Trust Gaps

2004-11-05T19:37:00.000-05:00

The DLC has released an analysis of what they believe were the mistakes made in the election. Here are some excerpts that serve as an interesting starting point to move on from:

"We have no easy excuses for this defeat. Democrats had a smart, tough candidate at the top of the ticket, and superior candidates all across the country. We had plenty of money, the best organization of our lifetimes, extraordinary enthusiasm, and greater unity than at any time in living memory. Democrats faced a vulnerable incumbent with a bad record who deliberately abandoned the political center, and whose case for a second term was constantly undermined by the consequences of his failures as displayed on the nightly news. And his party produced a do-nothing Congress with no accomplishments worth running on. Ralph Nader was an electoral cipher. It's hard to ignore the basic problem: We didn't effectively make the case for firing the incumbents and replacing them with Democrats."

"The dynamics of this campaign have confirmed beyond a shadow of a doubt that Democrats suffer from three persistent 'trust gaps' in our message."

"The first 'trust gap' was on national security... while [Kerry] convinced Americans we would be smarter on national security, he could not overcome the party's reputation for being weaker, and that was a deal-breaker for many voters who didn't want to take any chances with their security. In other words, Bush didn't pay the ultimate price for his foreign policy failures because we couldn't put to rest doubts about Democrats."

"The second obvious problem for Democrats was a 'reform gap...' While Democrats did made a strong negative case against Bush, we never conveyed a positive agenda for reform."

"The third 'trust gap' that hurt Democrats was another hardy perennial: values and culture."

"The problem is that many millions of voters simply do not believe that Democrats take their cultural fears and resentments seriously, and that Republicans do."

"Dial Down The Mockery"

2004-11-05T11:49:00.000-05:00

Kevin Drum, over at Washington Monthly's Political Animal offers some guidance on how we should approach the post-Election division:

"We didn't lose the election by much, and there are plenty of red staters who aren't extremists. They're the ones who are uncomfortable with homosexuality, but understand that a steadily increasing acceptance of gay rights is probably inevitable. They don't want to ban abortion, but feel like it's common sense to require parental notification. And they're ready to agree that we need to do something about global warming, but that doesn't mean they take kindly to thinly veiled accusations that they're personally responsible for it just because they drive an SUV or eat a Big Mac.

"In other words, they disagree with us, but not so much that they can't be brought around or persuaded to vote for us based on other issues. Too often, though, a visceral loathing of being lectured at by city folks wins out and they end up marking their ballots for people like George Bush.

"So maybe we should knock it off. I know it's fun, but most of the time it's pointless and misguided — and it costs us elections and prevents even modest progress on issues we care about. That's a high price to pay for a bit of fun.

"And the best part is that it doesn't infringe on our core values at all. We don't all have to start quoting scripture, we just have to dial down the mockery a notch. Why give the Republicans bulletin board material, after all?"

Red State + Blue State = Purple Nation

2004-11-04T17:01:00.000-05:00

For all this talk the past couple of days of Red States and Blue States, I think this map helps to keep things in perspective.

Yes, we're still a country divided, but state boundaries are artificial. There were not two separate elections on Tuesday-- one Democratic and one Republican. There was one election. It's easy to say you disagree with a whole state and lots of people will try to use the Electoral College to justify this, but it just isn't so. For the most part, no matter how you voted, you disagree with a slight majority in some states and slight minority in others. And even at that, unless you're at the extreme of either side, it's probably true that a good number of those people you disagree with are much closer to your positions than you may feel right now. They just happen to be right on the other side of the divide. The thing to do now is not feel alienated and not alienate. We have to reach out and try to make people understand our values and, instead of chastising others for theirs, try to engage them civilly in a discussion about where to go from here.

Rudy for Justice or Security?

2004-11-04T10:59:00.000-05:00

Daily Kos reports that rumors are flying about Rudolph Giuliani possibly replacing John Ashcroft as Attorney General or Tom Ridge as Secretary of Homeland Security.

Pleas For People

2004-11-04T10:19:00.000-05:00

Bull Moose makes a call for the media to do its job as the second Bush term gets under way:

"With conservative Republican margins strengthened and hubris riding high in the G.O.P. saddle, we will need the fourth estate as never before to serve as the public's watchdog. Watchdogs yes, lapdogs, no!"

He also calls on Democrats to begin embracing the faith of the people who overwhelmingly turned out in the red states on Election Day:

"Even though Republicans are in political control, much of the country believes that liberals dominate our culture - and that it is deteriorating. Democrats need to spend less time in Hollywood and more time at Pentecostal prayer meetings. Too many Democrats scoff at President Bush's profession of faith. They snickered when then Governor Bush pronounced at one of the primary debates that Christ was his favorite philosopher. That may very well have been the moment when W. solidified his relationship with the religious conservatives - more important than his position on gay rights and abortion.

"Take it from the Moose - Mr. Donkey, your views on economic growth and health care access are not going to be heard unless broad swaths of America believe that you are one of them."