Duncan Hunter's apple does not fall far from the tree. His son, the aptly named Junior, aims to continue his legacy of inanity and outlandish statements. With that, I give you Junior's latest tirade:
Interviewer: You are not in favor of repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell. Why not?
Rep. Duncan Hunter: No, because I think that it's bad for the cohesiveness and the unity of the military units. And, especially for those in close combat -- in close quarters -- in country right now. It's not the time to do it. I think the military is not civilian life. I think the folks who have been in the military, that have been in those very close situations with each other -- there has to be a special bond there. I think that bond is broken if you open up the military to transgenders; to hermaphrodites; to gays and lesbians.
Interviewer: Transgenders and hermaphrodites.
Rep. Duncan Hunter: That's going to be part of this whole thing. It's not just gays and lesbians, it's the whole gay, lesbian, transgender, bisexual community. If you're going to let anybody in, no matter what preference -- what sexual preference -- they have, that means the military is going to probably let everybody in. It's going to be like civilian life. And, I think that would be detrimental for the military. (Pam's House Blend
First, I would point out that hermaphrodites are people who are born into the world as they are. Even the right wing arguments against the LGBT community, that it's some sort of choice, carry no weight whatsoever against those who were born with non-standard genitalia. Perhaps Duncan should read one of the biggest bestsellers of our time, Jeffry Eugenides Middlesex.
Yet the bigger question is what does this say about Duncan Hunter, Jr, and what does it say about what he thinks about the military. Gays and lesbians have been serving, closted, for years. Order has not disappeared, the ranks haven't descended into chaos. In Europe, militaries have integrated gays and lesbians a long time ago. Yet, somehow, the American military can't handle that?
I think these comments say far more about Duncan Hunter and his perceptions of the military than anything about gays and lesbians in the military.
Rep. Barbara Lee [D-CA9], proved she has a backbone when in 2001 she stood up against war and became the only member of congress to vote "No" on the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists (AUMF), and she was oh so right.
Now, Barbara has again taken the lead in trying to stop the insane decision to expand and escalate the war in Afghanistan. Her bill, H.R. 3699 "To prohibit any increase in the number of members of the United States Armed Forces serving in Afghanistan," has been referred to the House Armed Services Committee. Link: http://www.govtrack.us/congres... Cosponsors:
Yvette Clarke [D-NY11] Emanuel Cleaver [D-MO5] Steve Cohen [D-TN9]
John Conyers [D-MI14] Donna Edwards [D-MD4] Keith Ellison [D-MN5]
Bob Filner [D-CA51] Alan Grayson [D-FL8] Raul Grijalva [D-AZ7]
Maurice Hinchey [D-NY22] Michael Honda [D-CA15] Sheila Jackson-Lee [D-TX18] Dennis Kucinich [D-OH10] John Lewis [D-GA5] James McDermott [D-WA7]
James McGovern [D-MA3] Jerrold Nadler [D-NY8] Fortney Stark [D-CA13] Edolphus Towns [D-NY10] Nydia Velázquez [D-NY12]Maxine Waters [D-CA35]
Diane Watson [D-CA33] Lynn Woolsey [D-CA6]
As you can see, MOST of our 53 California representatives have NOT signed onto the bill. No Waxman. No Berman. No Sherman. No Schiff. Just those heroes in bold above are on this short list. CONTACT your representative to ask that they co-sponsor and support this important legislation to take back the war powers as in our constitution. And thank those who have signed on.
Here's the link to the committee: http://www.govtrack.us/congres... The Democratic Chair is Rep. Ike Skelton [D-MO4] with the ranking Republican member Rep. Howard McKeon [R-CA25] (Santa Clarita and east), Rep. Duncan Hunter [R-CA52], and the TWO DEMOCRATS from CA:
Rep. Susan Davis [D-CA53] (San Diego) and Rep. Loretta Sanchez [D-CA47] (Garden Grove-Santa Ana).
Please CONTACT these people on the committee right away and ask that this bill be brought to a vote immediately. With the impending announcement coming from Obama, there is no time to lose.////
• The latest Don Perata story concerned money he took from his own ballot campaign account into his legal defense fund. He's entitled to do that for the time being, but the Fair Political Practices Commission is considering new rules to strengthen the campaign finance laws around these kinds of accounts. I think "abolished" might be a good way to go for these slush funds.
• Supervisor Mark Ridley-Thomas has a pretty cool tribute to Martin Luther King on his website today, on the occasion of his 80th birthday. Eight elected officials in LA County answer the question, "What is the significance of this year's Martin Luther King Day to you?"
• New Rep. Duncan Hunter, following in the legacy of his father, is whining about potential Guantanamo detainees behind held temporarily at Camp Pendleton. He claims their presence would "distract" the Marines there. Considering these detainees have been held in what amounts to a concentration camp and tortured, I think "distraction" is but a small price to pay.
• On yesterday's SCHIP vote, which passed resoundingly in the House, Hunter joined most California Republicans in voting against medical care for children. Only Mary Bono Mack defied her Republican counterparts.
• The CBP blog thinks we should look at enterprise zone programs as a good place to start cutting the budget. A new study by the PPIC claims they are completely ineffective. I'm all for eliminating useless tax breaks.
• There is a Los Angeles municipal election on March 3, and the only race worth following is a crowded contest for Jack Weiss' old city council seat. Six candidates (including progressive former Assemblyman Paul Koretz) all raised roughly the same amount of money in the last quarter.
• This is a pretty big ruling for environmentalists, as an Australian firm has bowed to pressure and scrapped their plans for an LNG terminal off of Santa Monica Bay.
• And then there's the story about the California man who tried to sell his 14 year-old daughter into marriage for cash, beer and meat, and then attempted to have the groom arrested when he wouldn't pay up. Hey, I didn't know that the dowry was back in fashion!
First, it was Duncan Hunter Sr. who would always refuse to debate. He was the incumbent Republican, in a very red district, so in a way that makes sense. But now his son is doing it too. Only his son isn't an incumbent, though he's trying to run like one. First, it was a debate hosted by the East County League of Women Voters, next, it was a debate on a conservative radio show, hosted by Rick Amato. Little Duncan Jr. apparently is terrified of facing off with his opponent, Commander Mike Lumpkin. This tactic of avoiding debates is undemocratic, and insult to the voters of the 52nd district. We deserve to hear from the candidates themselves.
It's a pattern, and an unfortunate one, of behaving exactly as his father does.
So he came all the way back to San Diego and didn't go to his district. Why? So that he could burnish his fake-environmentalist credentials by...celebrating the destruction of local wetlands. Now this might be a bit confusing if you've been receiving any of Bilbray's official franking mail recently, because they claim he's "keeping our beaches and water clean." Except of course that he's not. It's convenient though- he can send these barely-legal and completely dishonest mail pieces from DC so he never has to go to the district and face the voters, then he can come to San Diego and claim he's been to town even though his event isn't in the district and directly contradicts his mailers, and then he can go back to DC hoping that everyone noticed a little bit but not too much. Because it probably wouldn't be too good for him if people looked very closely at him or his voting record.
For the last few months, Calitics has been part of the Ruckus Blog on Newsweek. This week we're starting a question feature. The question this week asks who would be a bold pick for John McCain and Barack Obama as VP candidates. This being a California blog, I have some answers for that question. I'm not going to say these would be good picks, but they will be bold. McCain: Duncan "wildebeest" Hunter. Barack Obama: Barbara Boxer.
Duncan Hunter: Let's look at Duncan Hunter first. He's a longtime congressman and first time presidential candidate this cycle. The man is clearly insane, so much so that he wants to feed the Darfur refugees with wildebeest that he shoots himself. And that's not all. He wants to turn Santa Rosa Island into a hunting park for, well, anybody that carries enough political clout for him to get through. He tried veterans, then moved to disabled veterans. I'm pretty sure he'll next say that Santa Rosa Island should be a wildebeest hunting refuge for the Darfur refugees next. Or something like that.
Hunter is a conservative's conservative. He won't help you carry California, but he will bring the NRA and a whole slew of gun enthusiasts to your side. He won't bring the votes of military families that have been torn apart by the foolish war in Iraq, but he will bring you Pentagon contractors. He's real tight with them. This is a certainly a bold pick.
Duncan Hunter: Conservative, Gun-toting, and Completely Insane. Now, that's Bold.
Barbara Boxer: On the more serious side, Barbara Boxer would be a phenomenal choice to take the lower line of the Democratic ticket. She is enormously popular with the Democratic Wing of the Democratic Party (meaning us liberals), and would create an historic ticket. While I'm not sure that Boxer would make up for a Clinton loss, the Obama/Boxer ticket would break boundaries that should have been broken long ago.
Boxer has been fighting for California in the Senate since 1990 and has truly done a phenomenal job. Her leadership regarding climate change has been overshadowed by Al Gore, but has been critical to whatever movement there has been on the issue. She opposed the Iraq War, reinforcing Obama's position.
She's not on the short list, likely because she would be seen as "too liberal" or due to the fact that she's from California, a state where Obama leads by 24 points. That's a shame. Yet, Boxer would be a truly visionary selection to usher in a new governance that could build a progressive majority for years to come.
The real question here is whether these military contractors think they're contributing to the same Duncan Hunter or not.
Records show connections between companies Rep. Hunter has worked with and some individuals who are contributing to his son's campaign.
Rep. Hunter added language to the 2008 Defense Appropriations bill awarding $19 million to L-3 Communications, which has an office in San Diego, for the development and testing of a missile system, according to data compiled by Taxpayers for Common Sense. Executives from that company contributed $2,750 to Duncan D. Hunter's campaign.
Rep. Hunter also earmarked San Diego-based Trex Enterprises Corp. $1.5 million for the development of a device that will help helicopter pilots navigate with limited visibility. Campaign finance records show Trex employees, including a scientist, donated $4,800 to Duncan D. Hunter's campaign.
Lobbyists working for the companies have also supported Hunter's campaign. Patrick McSwain and Frank Collins, who were listed as principals at the lobbying firm Northpoint Strategies, collectively donated $2,500. Northpoint worked on behalf of L-3. McSwain and Collins were both former [Rep. Duke] Cunningham chiefs of staff.
You know, why wouldn't they? Hunter was a reliable champion for whatever boondoggle weapons system these contractors thought up, even planes that can't fly. There's no reason to believe that his son won't act the same way.
Calitics has endorsed Democrat Mike Lumpkin in this seat.
This afternoon, Chris Bowers has an excellent piece: Once In A Generation Is Now. It argues that this election is the opportunity to go all in and make dramatic changes throughout this country. This is our chance to change the tone of discourse. This is our chance to break the GOP machine. And most importantly, this is our chance to get a strong progressive majority to DC that can pass legislation that's been waiting for 30 or more years. Now.
So I can't help but look around California for signs that all the chips are being pushed to the center. Dave noted earlier that there could, on the outer edge, as many as nine California seats in play this year, and certainly recent Democratic successes in Illinois, Louisiana and Mississippi suggest that the ability to win anywhere is now a reality.
While every district is unique, projections are rough at best, and anything can happen between now and November, the odds are slim of there being a better time to go for broke in the forseeable future. So I look around California and I see that between the 34 Democratic incumbents in California's congressional delegation, there's more than $14.6 million cash on hand. Out of those 34, only one (Jerry McNerney) is facing a serious challenge, freeing up a great deal of time and money to invest in races around the state.
(An interesting tack to take in the 52nd district - promoted by Brian Leubitz)
Mike Lumpkin, retired Navy SEAL and candidate for the 52nd Congressional District, released the following press release this morning regarding yesterday's California Supreme Court decision on same sex marriage.
Yesterday the California Supreme Court overturned a voter-approved ban on gay marriage igniting a storm of divisive partisan reaction across the nation. Retired Navy SEAL Commander and 52nd Congressional District Candidate, Mike Lumpkin, sees the decision and subsequent reaction as an unfortunate yet expected diversion. "Election after election extremists drive this emotionally polarizing issue and marginalize the concerns of everyday Americans," said Lumpkin.
If the candidate is Mike Lumpkin, victory in November is not only possible, but perhaps likely. Granted, there is still a primary election in June, but at a forum last week hosted by the League of Women Voters, Vickie Butcher proved once again that she had no command of the issues. For much of the debate she seemed lost and unable to formulate a coherent answer for questions on healthcare, the economy and the war on terror. It was painful, at times, to watch her struggle with issues on which she clearly had not researched. Though a pleasant and accomplished educator, Vickie Butcher is simply over her head in this race. As dismal as her prospects for congressional success are, however, those of Mike Lumpkin not only give Democrats encouragement, but the best likelihood for victory since 1980 when a young Duncan Hunter edged out a victory against a Democrat incumbent by the name of Lionel Van Deerling.
Lumpkin is a retired Navy SEAL Commander with both combat and leadership experience. Those qualifications alone will earn him a significant number of cross-over votes, which will be necessary in the conservative 52nd. If that isn't enough, he is moderate and pragmatic on the issues and can pull off what Duncan Hunter was unable to do in his entire time as the district's representative-provide fair representation to all citizens of the district, not just those who support his campaign.
Lumpkin's campaign will not be an easy one, however. Though Duncan Hunter is relinquishing his seat, his name may still be on the ballot. Duncan D. Hunter, Jr. has moved back to California to keep the seat in the family, though not without a fight. His strongest opponent in the Republican primary-Brian Jones-is mounting an aggressive, but bleak grassroots campaign. Jones has not been intimidated by the Hunter dynasty and has repeatedly attacked Jr. for his lack of commitment to curb the use of earmarks.
Any of the Republican candidates will have to face a formidable Mike Lumpkin in the General. The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC), which will help fund the top 29 congressional races in order to attain a super-majority in the House, has recently upgraded Lumpkin's campaign from 20 to 14 and considers his resume the best of any congressional candidate in an open-seat race. Additionally, a recent Rasmussen poll suggests 2008 is not going to be a good year for the Republicans. He's the underdog now, but keep an eye on Mike Lumpkin. His will be the race to watch.
Progressive Democrats of America has presented a national endorsement to Vickie Butcher, Democratic candidate in the 52nd Congressional District.
This will mean national phone banking and other support for Vickie, who is running in an open seat to replace retiring Congressman Duncan Hunter.
"We couldn't be more happy or more proud," PDA Metro-San Diego president Judy Hess said in an e-mail informing Vickie of the national endorsement. "You've joined the ranks of Donna Edwards and other great progressives."
Vickie has fought for civil rights and voting rights, challenging segregation in her youth. She's been doing what is right ever since. She became a teacher of the deaf and later taught civics, before earning her law degree after her fifth child was born. She's chaired a local planning board and served on water and hospital boards. Nationally, she headed up the National Medical Association auxiliary, working with her husband, a physician, to make healthcare accessible to those in need. She supports universal healthcare for all and has expertise to make this a reality. Vickie also founded Water for Children Africa, meeting with world leaders and leading efforts to bring water and medicines to people in 15 nations. Now she's fighting to give a voice to all of us in Congress-not the special interests!
Read about Vickie's long history of progressive leadership here: www.votevickiebutcher.com
Vickie faces a tough primary battle against a former Navy Seal who was a liaison reprsenting the Department of Defense (Special Forces Operations) in Congress.
We've got people power to walk precincts and man phonebanks -- but need money to cinch victory. Please help by donating to help a true progressive and internationally acclaimed humanitarian win this seat! www.votevickiebutcher.com.
The National and local news media usually only focus on who 'wins' the caucus or primary race. They provide little information on election night regarding the important race, that for delegates.
This is interesting stuff from CNN.com, see http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/20... for the Republican totals and http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/20... for the Democratic totals (kudos to grodriguez for providing the link in his blog).
The magic number of delegates for the Democratic nominee is 2,025. Thus far, 386 Democratic delegates have been chosen, including those from today's Nevada Democratic caucuses as well as the so-called Super Delegates (e.g., governors, U.S. Senators, U.S. Representatives). This means that only 9.53% of the Democratic delegates are committed to date. Hillary Clinton leads the field far and away (I have deleted the Democratic candidates who have thus far dropped out of the race). The results are as follows:
There's some real data in the form of third-quarter fundraising numbers to pore over, and events in Washington and at home have served to focus on some of our Congressional candidates here in California. Plus, believe it or not, we're only about a year out from Election Day. Let's take a look at the top ten races.
As usual, I'm going to rank them in order of most possible pickup, including their number from the last roundup. I'm also, as usual, including the "Boxer number." Basically, seeing how Boxer fared in her 2004 re-election against Bill Jones in a particular district is a decent indicator of how partisan it is. If I put "57," that means Boxer received 57% of the vote. Anything over 50, obviously, is good. (over)
As the smoke begins to clear in San Diego, the stories and reactions to the fire will start competing with the recovery effort atop the fold. First on the minds of many in government seems, not surprisingly, to be response time and firefighting capacity. Unforunately, Republicans are again demonstrating that they make up in bluster what they lack in remote semblance of coherence. Southern California Republican Congressmen such as Duncan Hunter, Brian Bilbray, Darrell Issa, Jerry Lewis, Elton Gallegly and Dana Rohrabacher have been lining up for every available reporter to knock Governor Schwarzenegger and the state's CalFire bureaucracy for supposedly impeding firefighting efforts throughout the region last week. They've flown so dramatically off the handle in fact that even Chris Reed has it right on their craziness- or at least part of it:
The congressmen who are doing such a good job exposing the state's bureaucratic tomfoolery in its wildfire response have some explaining to do themselves. Couldn't they have spared an earmark to cover the cost of outfitting the California Air National Guard's C-130 with a fire-retardant tank, something that was promised to happen after the 2003 wildfires but never did?
Instead, Duncan Hunter funneled $63 million into the DP-2 Vectored Thrust Aircraft boondoggle. And Dana Rohrabacher worried more about buying expensive planes the military didn't want than about helping California's wildfire-fighting capacity. This is from a May story in the Washington Post:
... Rohrabacher (R-Calif.) has made one of the biggest earmark requests in the new Congress, seeking $2.4 billion to build 10 more C-17 planes -- which the Pentagon has said it does not need.
These gentlemen have ended up discussing almost every issue in the country, all in the context of the fire. And they've managed to be completely wrong every time. So without further ado, an "oh the humanity" sampling from the past week.
OK, I'm getting this in just under the wire. Time for the House roundup for September. There are a little over 13 months until Election Day, and with the end of the 3rd quarter on Sunday (donate), this election is really not that far away. In fact, CQ Politics has put out their initial assessment of the House landscape. It's favorable for Democrats, but predictably, there are only two California seats on that radar: CA-04 and CA-11. But there have been a lot of developments in the other races throughout the state as well.
I'm going to rank them in order of most possible pickup, including their number from the last roundup. I'm also, as usual, including the "Boxer number." Basically, seeing how Boxer fared in her 2004 re-election against Bill Jones in a particular district is a decent indicator of how partisan it is. If I put "57," that means Boxer received 57% of the vote. Anything over 50, obviously, is good. (over)
U.S. Judge John Bates in the DC District Court ruled yesterday that Representatives Bilbray, Hunter and Issa must provide some of their official documents to a Jewish Veterans group who filed suit last year. The veterans group is attempting to demonstrate that federal seizure of the land was designed to advance a religious goal.
CREW just released their 3rd annual "Most Corrupt Members of Congress" report. They list 22 members of Congress as the most corrupt. And with 5 members, California wins for the most on the list!!!
On behalf of all Golden Staters, I want to thank all of these Representatives for having the wisdom, foresight, and venality to give the state this honor. Sure, the ENTIRE Alaska delegation is on the list, making them slightly mnore corrupt. But 5 out of 22 is not bad. Not bad indeed. Especially when you consider that there are only 19 federal representatives who are Republican, and 5 of them made the list! That's called dedication!
Former House Speaker Dennis Hastert, House Republican Whip Roy Blunt and 11 other members of Congress have been subpoenaed to testify in the trial of a defense contractor charged with bribing jailed former Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham.
All of the lawmakers said they do not intend to comply with the subpoenas.
Those subpoenad include Hunter, Lewis, Doolittle, and as a bonus, Rep. Darrell Issa, who claimed "This subpoena is a mystery." House lawyers have said it would be against House rules to comply.
It looks like Wilkes' team of lawyers is set to argue that the lawmakers asked for the bribes, rather than the other way around. I think giving bribes is a crime, regardless of who asked for them, so I don't know how this will fly. But clearly, this could damage some Congressional reputations. Or in the case of the CREW list, enhance them! Let's go for 6 in 2008!
We have 15 months to go before Election Day, and it's time for another roundup of Congressional races. I am going to continue to focus on the top 10 challenges to Republican incumbents. There is certainly a concern in CA-11 with the Jerry McNerney/Dean Andal race, particularly after McNerney's "I'm a moderate" comment seemed to depress supporters. On the bright side, he did vote against the ridiculous FISA bill. And as we go into September, I would hope he would continue his efforts to end the occupation of Iraq. I will certainly cover the McNerney race in future roundups.
But for now, let's take a look at the top 10 challenges. I'm going to rank them in order of most possible pickup, including their number from the last roundup. I'm also adding the "Boxer number." Basically, seeing how Boxer fared in her 2004 re-election against Bill Jones in a particular district is a decent indicator of how partisan it is. If I put "57," that means Boxer received 57% of the vote. Anything over 50, obviously, is good. (over)
With 16 months to go before Election Day, some Democratic challengers are getting a little more visible in their efforts to unseat Republican incumbents. I see good news at the very top of the target list, and elsewhere we're still waiting to see who will run. Let's focus on the top 10 races where a Republican is currently serving, knowing that we are still going to have a fight in CA-11 to re-elect Jerry McNerney (although that probably won't be against Guy Houston, who may be on trial for fraud at the time).
So let's take a look at the top 10 challenges. I'm going to rank them in order of most possible pickup, including their number from the last roundup. I'm also adding the "Boxer number." Basically, seeing how Boxer fared in her 2004 re-election against Bill Jones in a particular district is a decent indicator of how partisan it is. If I put "57," that means Boxer received 57% of the vote. Anything over 50, obviously, is good. (over)
