In 2006, Democrats took back control of Congress because of public outrage at George Bush and the War in Iraq. But we should remember it almost didn't happen - until August, when Ned Lamont proved that Democrats can galvanize that energy to beat an incumbent Senator in a primary. Tomorrow, Pennsylvania Democrats will be asked to dump ex-Republican Arlen Specter - and in Arkansas, conservative Senator Blanche Lincoln also faces a primary challenge. And just like Joe Lieberman, the Party establishment is circling the wagons in both states - with President Obama shooting a radio ad that claims Lincoln "took on big insurance companies" to pass health care. A new poll shows that voters prefer Democrats over Republicans, which suggests that 2010 may not be the nightmare everyone fears. But it also showed that voters hate incumbents. If Democrats want to avoid a bloodbath in November, Specter and Lincoln must be defeated.
Woo-hoo. The healthcare bill is done. People will see many of the provisions go into place immediately and then they can decide how they feel about these reforms based on reality instead of frenzied, uninformed rhetoric. Let's just take a moment to recognize this historic occasion.
The resolution that passed today did not reflect Senator Boxer's belief that Senator Lieberman should remain in the Democratic caucus but not retain his full Committee Chairmanship- she voted accordingly.
Good vote by Boxer, you can find her online at Barbara Boxer dot com.
With word yesterday that President-Elect Obama wants Joe Lieberman to stay in the Democratic Caucus, the issue of his near-term future is a bit clearer. Wanting Lieberman to stay in the caucus of course is not at all the same thing as allowing him to keep his chairmanship of the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, which is the real question. But since the prospect remains of him retaining his chairmanship, it's worth considering what the impact would be.
It's maybe the second day of Group Psychology 101 that as soon as you start creating special rules for individuals, the entire system breaks apart. If Joe Lieberman keeps his chairmanship, what's the functional message to everyone else in the caucus? If I'm a conservative, red-state, but generally well behaved Senator like Ben Nelson, I'm thinking to myself "I didn't just spend two years with subpoena power over the Bush administration to campaign for the Republican presidential nominee and Senate candidates. I didn't refuse to stamp down Obama-is-a-Muslim rumors. I don't fear for the country if the party I want to caucus with gains power. I didn't spend the past year undermining the Democratic nominee for President. I didn't quit the party when it became personally inconvenient. If Lieberman gets to chair Homeland Security after all of that, what do I get?" And I won't even start to delve into what traditional liberal lions like Sen. Boxer must or at least should be thinking about all this. Doing the right thing gets you where?
It would create an active dis-incentive to party loyalty over personal ambition. The problem child gets the special attention. Anyone who grew up with a sibling or simply attended school knows how this works. Which brings us to Senator Dianne Feinstein. ALl indications are that she's in line to chair the Senate Intelligence Committee in the next Congress. Meanwhile, she's laying claim to the CW's inside track for California Governor in 2010. Combine those circumstances with the considerable number of Feinstein boosters who are convinced that there's some sort of magical party-bucking ratio that makes a reasonable and moderate California Democrat (the only sort of Democrat who could possibly win the Governor's race, natch) and Feinstein's dicey record on FISA, on trainwreck Attorney General Michael Mukasey, and support for the nomination of homophobic and racially questionable Judge Leslie Southwick, and you've put Feinstein in quite a position.
If Lieberman is allowed to retain his committee, then the lesson that chairing a committee is secondary to personal priorities leaves Feinstein campaigning for Governor as chair of the Intelligence Committee. Specifically, if burnishing her middle-of-the-road credentials for the governor's race collides with the interests of the Democratic Senate Caucus, the presidential agenda, or even the right thing, Senate Democrats would have signaled to her that her electoral ambitions come first. And in fact, that acting out is the best way to get special favors in DC, which would be good to have when it comes time for big name stumpers in 2010.
Now, far be it from me to suggest that the United States Senate operates on the same psychological level as a group of children. But the potential power-play aspects of this are clear and inescapable. Unless we rally to the Lieberman Must Go cause now, we risk a free for all that undermines the Senate and the Obama agenda and sets a clear example that personal ambition trumps Democratic functionality. And if bucking the system is how you get places, then bucking the system is what we'll get more of. And I certainly don't want to give Senator Feinstein more incentive to run to the right for the next two years.
full disclosure: I work for the Courage Campaign but write this independently
So I just got back from a McCain rally here in San Diego and aside from feeling dirty, he's definitely a bit worried about California. He brought out every gun he's got, big, little, whatever. He was introduced by Mayor Jerry Sanders, former CA SoS Bill Jones and Governor Schwarzenegger (McCain "will say 'Hasta la vista' to wasteful spending in Washington."). On stage but silent were locals such as my councilman Kevin Faulconer and County Supervisor Ron Roberts. Along for the ride on the plane and the photo ops were wife Cindy, mother Roberta, and his murderers row of pseudo-moderates: Governor Crist from Florida and Senators Richard Burr, Lindsay Graham and Joe Lieberman. They didn't say anything but they stood there very moderately.
And then Senator McCain went ON AND ON about the evils of radical Islamic extremism (radical extremism? Is it also exceptionally unique? Largely big?). He told people that it's a titanic struggle against people who want to destroy everything and that there is nothing more evil than what we're up against. He gave "my friends" plenty of "straight talk" about...evil. Troops aren't coming home because that would be surrender (does that mean that we can't win if the troops come home?). He said that he was the only one who knew Rumsfeld's plan would fail and the Petraeus plan was necessary (presumably not even Petraeus knew). Spent about two seconds on making tax cuts permanent and saying that it's bad when Congress spends money (just like the Constitution says. Oh wait...).
Closed things off trying to roll around in the filth of the Reagan legacy and then noting that $35 billion in earmarks could have gone towards $1000 for every child in the country. How much would the $2 trillion in Iraq money have translated into for the kids? McCain was mum on this point (the answer because I like math is...a whole lot more).
Point is, McCain is desperate to make everyone scared because he's scared of Romney. Rally in San Diego seven hours before the polls close to talk about fear? Hm.
You have to be a complete fool to claim to be a Democrat and then package in your campaign trial balloon a prepared statement of praise from Joe Lieberman. Anyone you has been paying any attention knows that is the kiss of death in Democratic politics, especially in a blue seat in a major blue geographic area effectively serviced by mass transit. I'm surprised we haven't seen any quotes (yet) from Dan Gerstein.
I don't have a problem with people who worked for Lieberman running for office, but there needs to be an apology right off the bat so voters recognize that the candidate has learned the errors of their ways and is willing to take responsibility all those who have suffered due to their support for Bush's main man in the senate.
But that isn't the route Yul Kwon (CA for Leiberman) is taking. Nope, he seems to think Lieberman praising him makes him look good (like Bush, or like Brownie during his confirmation). That just isn't the case. Speier v Yee would have been a hard fought but fair campaign. Yet anyone running on the Connecticut for Lieberman ticket in the Bay Area should expect far, far worse.
UPDATE: Even one of our friends at the California Majority Report agrees that, "being a former Lieberman staffer doesn't really win one a lot of friends in the Democratic Party."
I wrote this for today's Beyond Chron, San Francisco's Alternative Online Daily
As further proof that Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign does not deserve progressive support, the New York Senator announced yesterday that she has received another prominent endorsement – from Congresswoman Ellen Tauscher of Walnut Creek. As chair of the New Democrat Coalition, Tauscher is a so-called “moderate” Democrat who supported the War in Iraq until recently, is a hawk on defense spending, and has routinely deserted progressives for business interests. Last October, merely days before the mid-term elections, she publicly fretted that party activists were driving the Democratic Party “over the left cliff.”
Democratic strategist Garry South, who advised Connecticut Sen. Joe Lieberman during his bid for the party's 2004 nomination, said "there's always a danger when you're running for public office that a pattern of behavior starts to emerge. And it might be utterly unfair to draw conclusions when things add up to a pattern -- but that's what people do, and that's what the media does.''
If you want a pattern, let's talk about Garry South destroying the (all once-bright) futures of Gray Davis, Joe Lieberman, and Steve Westly. It is literally like he won't hire a client without potential to be on the top 10 list of the biggest losers in the Democratic Party this millennium. There are plenty of reasons for the Open Letter to Garry South.
And can we finally retire the term of him as a "Democratic strategist" after all the evidence the Democratic Party rejects him everywhere he goes? He's a "Connecticut for Lieberman" strategist and has the record to prove it.
Yesterday the Calitics staff sat down with Sen. Christopher Dodd, Senate Banking Committee chair and candidate for President in 2008, for about a 30-minute interview. Dodd impressed me as someone who thinks clearly about issues and the implications of them, who carefully ponders all of his decisions, and who always strives to do the right thing. In other words, a Democrat.
He's also embraced new media, hiring Tim Tagaris, who should be familiar to the netroots as having worked on Ned Lamont's campaign (here's a bio). Dodd talked about the new media era and how it can impact a campaign like his that is looking to get their views out in the face of the media-hyped monster that his Hillack Clintobama.
The full interview (not transcribed, but paraphrased) on the flip:
There has already been a great diary on the East Bay Express recycling stale insider dogma by calling Ellen Tauscher "moderate" instead of using the label "big business" which is far more accurate.
But that wasn't the only major blunder by New Times Media reporter Chris Thompson. The more glaring example of his failure to understand the dynamics was his dismissing of the viability of the primary challenge to Tauscher. Thompson said that this was a "pipe dream" and declared that Democratic Party activists "won't win" despite all of the evidence to the contrary.
That is what "they" said about Tauscher bagman Steve Filson in CA-11 who was stomped by 24 pts in last year's primary in a more conservative district right next door. It was a landslide, he was beaten like a drum. Filson is a punchline in East Bay politics.
That is what "they" said about the primary campaign against then-Congressman Jeffery Cohelan who was again in a neighboring district to Tauscher but lost his re-nomination even with the union support Tauscher won't enjoy.
That is what "they" said about Joe Lieberman, who had been the Democratic Party VP nominee yet also lost his primary in no small part to the netroots.
If you want to know what bands are playing, check out the East Bay Express. But don't expect them to help you understand political dynamics they don't get.
(The comments are funny. - promoted by Brian Leubitz)
Dear Presidential Candidates,
In the extended text you will find the complete open letter to the presidential candidates. I wrote the letter in hopes of deterring candidates from making the kinds of mistakes that South has made throughout his career and to avoid the Democratic infighting that South is so happy to instigate. I warn candidates that by hiring Garry South, you will be wearing the Scarlet Letter "T" as in Triangulator or DLC or whatever. I think we all get the point.
I appreciate your attention to the letter. Of course, feedback is appreciated. Finally, please recommend this letter at MyDD and DailyKos
Lisa Vorderbrueggen has an article in today's Contra Costa Times, titled, Bloggers take Tauscher to task. The article has a number of huge problems, let me list some of mine and I'm sure others will chime in with their complaints.
First off, I don't see how this story could be written without mentioning that the exact same thing happened to Congressman Jeffery Cohelan in the next district over. OK, maybe not the exact same thing because Cohelan went into his unsuccessful 1970 primary with strong labor support. But the complete lack of historical perspective does damage to the analysis.
But not as much damage as this:
Yes, Tauscher voted to allow President Bush to start the Iraq war. But so did every other Democrat in the nation except one.
That is a lie. A lie in the pages of the Contra Costa Times. In reality, Tauscher was one of only two Bay Area Democrats to support the unnecessary, unilateral, invasion of Iraq with the vast majority opposed. In all, only 81 Democrats voted the wrong way on the biggest issue of our time with 126 voting no, meaning 60% of house Democrats were opposed.
This failure to understand even the most basic dynamics and history means this isn't the type of article I would recommend people reading.
If last week was defined by Katie Merrill catapulting a primary campaign against Congresswoman Ellen Tauscher, this was the week that Tauscher tried in vain to distance herself from Joe Lieberman.
Today's look at Joe Lieberman and Ellent Tauscher is brought to you by a special machine that takes you way back to August 14, 2000:
"I asked Ellen to nominate me because we share the values and concerns of America's working families and understand the real issues that affect their everyday lives. Ellen is a strong and effective leader with a vision for the future to build on the foundation of our unprecedented prosperity and use the surplus to benefit all working families," said Senator Lieberman.
Of course, Joementum flopped in the debate, rolled over during the recount, and the surplus was spent on their war. Lieberman and Tauscher both over-compensate for their insecurity by enabling the Republican Party. The gains we made last year were in-spite of the way these two constantly seek to find the halfway point between good and stupid. If you tell them the Democratic base thinks gravity is 9.8 m/s/s, they'll suggest we start the negotiations at 4.9 m/s/s and insist that eventually the GOP will acknowledge at least a degree of gravity. The main difference is that Tauscher won't get a do-over.
Although Ellen Tauscher's congressional staff scrubbed from her federal website photos of George Bush (see 1, 2, 3, 4) and Joe Lieberman (see 1 & 2), they seem to have forgotten to scrub the text:
At the Democratic National Convention in Los Angeles, she gave a nominating speech for Sen. Joe Lieberman's Vice Presidential bid...
In her new capacity within the New Democrats, Rep. Tauscher will lead the centrist, pro-growth members of the House to find mainstream solutions on issues such as technology and trade. Rep. Tauscher recently served as National Vice Chair of the centrist Democratic Leadership Council, where she traveled across the country, meeting with elected officials and building a base of New Democrats for state and national office.
As anyone paying attention to trends in Democratic Party politics will tell you, not exactly the stuff you want to brag about going into a primary.
Emboldened by their role in the Dem sweep, liberal bloggers are now targeting Rep. Ellen Tauscher (D-CA 10), a Bay Area centrist, pro-business Dem in the mold of Joe Lieberman.
But defenders of Tauscher note that Kos and some others in the blogosphere sharply targeted the moderate Lieberman -- and got credit for getting him defeated in the Democratic primary -- only to find their influence was viewed as profoundly weakened when he was handily re-elected as an independent in the mid-term elections.
Tauscher can't run as an independent once she loses and it was the same blogs that BEAT LIEBERMAN that also put Tester and Webb over the top. I don't know who views flipping the senate as "profoundly weakened" influence, but Marinucci should stop listening to them.
