Mornin' Roundup (not the weedkiller)

The Jobs Report is out this morning, and estimates were off by over 104K...in the wrong direction; and, last month's numbers were revised downwards as well. I guess counting burger flippers as "manufacturing jobs" didn't work out quite like the Bushies planned. According to the BLS, the U.S. Economy created 21,000 jobs last month. As Atrios points out, "to keep up with the growth in the working age population we need about 140K new jobs per month, and also keep in that they [the Bush administration] claimed that after the last round of tax cuts they'd create 306,000 jobs per month, something they haven't achieved once."

US Rep. Tom Cole (R-OK) has "stirred up" Dems and the blogosphere by saying a vote against the re-election of Pres. Bush is "like supporting Adolph Hitler during World War Two." I guess he never did too well on those "compare and contrast" essays in English class. Cole is also quoted in the Yukon Review as saying: "If George Bush loses the election, Osama bin Laden wins the election." Does he have the inside scoop are Kerry's running mate? So far, there has been "no comment" from OK Dem Party leaders to see if they think Cole is comparing John Kerry to Hitler or bin Laden (KTOK-AM, 3/3). "It's OK by me!" Oklahoma Democrats. Well at least they voted for Clark.

This is why I thought Kerry or Dean would be a bad pick for president: Freshman US Rep. Rodney Alexander (D-LA) is "seriously considering" leaving the Dem Party "because he says" Kerry "is too liberal, and that he might be able to better represent his constituents" as a GOPer (New Orleans Times-Picayune).

A Research 2000 IL SEN poll of LVs found Dems Barack Obama with 22% support; Dan Hynes 20%; Blair Hull 15% and Maria Pappas 14%. On the GOP side, Jack Ryan had 38%; Jim Oberweis 15% and Andrew McKenna 10% (release). I guess it was the wife beating thing that did it to Hull and Obama's $10,000 check from Michael Jordan himself that got him into the lead.

Gov. Rick Perry (R-TX), on the rumors that he is gay: "They are not correct in any shape, form or fashion. ... These are irresponsible. They're salacious. They're hurtful to my family." Perry also said "he has been targeted by 'an obvious, orchestrated effort' launched by political foes" (Austin American-Statesman).

Oh and the phony Iraqi constitution signing has been delayed again. I guess multiple, coordinated suicide bombings killing the U.S. equivalent of 3,000 people (we have 10x more people and about 300 people died) might do that.
"A formally dressed, six-piece classic music group played under the watch of a U.S. soldier in combat gear as officials trickled in the for 4 p.m. (8 a.m. ET) ceremony at the former conference hall of ousted dictator Saddam Hussein.

"The document is to be signed on a desk used by King Faisal I. Faisal led Iraq when the country received its independence in 1932 after years under a League of Nations mandate administered by Britain. " Who's paying for all this? Well it should be Bush-Cheney 2004, but it is all us taxpayers.

Meanwhile, BushCo, this time is ex-NYC Mayor Rudy "I want to be President in 2008 or VP now" Giuliani, is still defending angry 9-11 families, firefighters, and Democrats who are upset that his ads exploit the tragedy for his reelection campaign.

Good work Democrats, if you can't afford ads, at least it can afford outrage and distraction of the Bush machine.

Into the great wide open

Senator Ben Nighthorse Campbell (R-CO) decided not to run for reelection yesterday for "health reasons," and by health reasons he means kickback scandal.

The Denver Post reported that "The allegation centers on [Chief of Staff] Ginnie Kontnik's admitted action in 2002 of inflating an aide's salary and asking him to give her $2,000 in return. The claim was first documented in the aide's resignation letter in 2003.

"Kontnik, who resigned her $142,000-a- year position Friday citing personal reasons, denies the arrangement was a kickback. But after a day of questioning by The Denver Post concerning Kontnik's departure, Campbell said he would refer the matter to the Ethics Committee."


What does this mean? A wide open race. Here are some potential people who might run:

1. ex-Sen. Gary Hart (D). [offically out according to state party chair]
   
2. Governor Bill Owens (R)
   
3. Multimillionaire Think Tank head Rutt Bridges (D)
   
   
4. Teacher Mike Miles (D)
   
   
5. Retiring Congressman and Anti-Immigrant Nut Tom Tancredo (R)
   
   
   
6. Son of one time presidential candidate/fmr. Interior Secretary, Congressman Mark Udall (D)

This all means that the race is going to be as wide open as a church's doors on Sunday. I think this not only puts the senate more in play for the Democrats, it could put the whole state in play for Kerry if Republicans can't get the governor in and get some one like Tancredo or worse, Rep. Marilyn Musgrave, the author of the Federal Marriage Amendment

In other news...

Bush has three silly ads up now. One exploits 9/11, another has him playing fake president with Laura by his side, telling us "I know exactly where I want to lead this country." Where, into the depths of Hell? I have seen zero leadserhip from Bush outside 9/11, although anyone who was president would have done what he did. All of Bush's actions are based on the rubric of "Will this help me get re-elected?" not "What is best for the country?" Ok and the third blames everything from the economy to 9/11 on Bill Clinton indirectly. If he didn't have over $150 million and actually was president right now, I would be laughing. Instead, I shudder.

Name that Cabinet!

Now that the nomination is over sooner than ever before since Edwards dropped out last night, John Kerry will eclipsed by other more trivial items of news and Bush's bully pulpit. Bush's millions will start to blanket him tomorrow. In fact, I was interrupted from typing just now by a RNC pop-up asking me to "support the president's agenda" the funniest part was "lower interest rates" something which is making progressively higher with his tax-cut and spend budgets.

But back to the point; how is Kerry to keep a positive image of him going until the July Convention in Boston? Sure MoveOn's ad campaign this week will help, but Bush is going to be spending way more money. My suggestion? Slowly name your cabinet. Make it like the family feud and leak names to the press of people in the running for various spots.

Have each one of the 9 other democrats who lost to you have a fundraising race on your behalf to get in your cabinet and on your agenda. Ditto for VP wannbes like FL Sen. Bob Graham, NM Gov. Bill Richardson, IN Sen. Evan Bayh, and all the rest of them. Hell, hold a couple fundraisers with Hill and Bill. That if nothing else will fuel the fire of attention (I can see the NY Post header now: "Kerry-Clinton 2004?") like the Clintons. Even talk about who you might replace Terry McAuliffe with in 2005. '

Here's whom I might pick out slowly, if I were Kerry (realistically, with backups):

• VP: Bayh (see why here) or Edwards


• State: Clark (already has good relationships with Europe) or Richard Holbrook


• Defense: John McCain (nobody else will have credibility to cut out wasteful Pentagon spending during a war like this Maverick; plus, Gov. Napalitano (D) gets to name a new Senator with a full two year term) or Bob Kerrey.


• Treasury: Bob Rubin (no one has more [Wall] Street Cred than Ruby) or Larry Summers


• AG: John Edwards (he'll crack down on the FBI and its crappy performance that will remind folks of Bobby Kennedy) or Elliot Spitzer


• CIA director: Graham (former Intelligence Chairman knows his stuff and won't lie to President Kerry) or Gary Hart.


• Homeland Security: Gary Hart (his commission in 1999 was eerily right about 9/11) or Graham


• Commerce: George Sorros (hey if you give several million to elect Kerry, I think you deserve a plum like this) some other rich dude who helps Kerry raise dough


• Labor: Gephardt (if he can pass the Senate) Bob Reich


• HHS: Dr. Judith Steinberg (aka Judy Dean) or Howard Dean (I'd prefer him to be DNC chair)


• OMB: Dem. Senate Staffer on the Budget Committee


• Agriculture: Tom Vislack or Rob Atkinson (PPI VP)


• Interior: Deb Callahan (LCV head) or Jan Mazurek (DLC environment person)


• Chief of Staff: Mary Beth Cahill or Jim Jordan (both did good jobs on the campaign)


• Veteran's: Cleland (triple amputee will make sure Vet's are left out in the cold) or one of Kerry's "Band of Brothers"


• Energy: Grey Davis (this cost him the election, among other things) or John Dingle (get him out of the House)


• Education: Ted Kennedy or George Miller (heads of Dem committees in Senate and House)


• Transportation: James Oberstar (heads of Dem committee in House) and Doug Duncan (Montgomery Co., MD Executive)

Please comment on your picks, or critique mine below.

Where's the fat lady? Plus: Dean finally wins one

Jack Shafer, Slate's Editor At Large, is posting the mid-way exit polls from the Eastern block of Super Tuesday states.

As expected, Kerry is kicking butt.

Connecticut
Kerry 63
Edwards 26
Dean 5

Georgia
Kerry 50
Edwards 39
Sharpton 7

Maryland
Kerry 59
Edwards 28
Sharpton 4

Massachusetts
Kerry 75
Edwards 16
Dean 3
Kucinich 3

New York
Kerry 61
Edwards 21
Sharpton 10

Ohio
Kerry 58
Edwards 30
Kucinich 10

Rhode Island
Kerry 70
Edwards 21
Dean 5

Vermont
Dean 63
Kerry 33
Kucinich 3
(Edwards was not on the ballot)

Also, California is not out yet due to time zones. But I would guess the results are the same. Now Edwards has to leave gracefully so that Democrats will want him to be VP or President in 2008. Tough luck JRE.

Hat's off to Dean for winning his own state without even trying. Too bad his former campaign and former campaign manager Joe Trippi are squabbling over their supporters, no matter what spin they put on it.

Ex-Dean speechwriter Joe Drymala writes at ex-Dean manager Joe Trippi's Change for America blog: on 3/1 that Howard Dean "posted on Blog for America and on these forums, making it clear that Dean for America and Change for America are two different organizations. We agree with him completely."

More Drymala: "Change for America will be doing something very different from Dean for America -- rather than duplicating each other's efforts, we will be complementary. The last thing we want is for the media to have the opportunity to fabricate a "turf war" between CFA and DFA where none exists. It's not fair to the grassroots and it hurts the movement for change. And we don't want to put anyone in the position of feeling as though being a part of one effort is somehow disloyal to the other. CFA and DFA will have entirely different purposes... [W]e'll be making a survey available online shortly to help shape the platform of Change for America" (changeforamerica.com, 3/1).

Powell's "correction" to Aristide's claims

Sec/State Colin Powell: "He went onto the airplane willingly. And that's the truth." Powell "also admonished two" Hill members "for suggesting U.S. troops strong-armed the Haitian into exile." Powell: "It would have been better for members of Congress who have heard these stories to ask us about the stories before going public with them so that we don't make a difficult situation that much more difficult."

The Times went on to say that while U.S. officials "insist that they did not force" Aristide to leave, "they acknowledge that they made it clear to him that they could not protect him if he clung to power, and that they offered to give him safe passage out of the country if he would leave by dawn on Sunday." What a great choice! Either live in exile, or risk being killed my an armed mob of distgruntled ex-army men.

Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CT), talked to CNN's Wolf Blitzer about the Aristide kidnapping allegations and summed it up nicely. "I have certainly heard the accusations and I've heard the rebuttal by the administration. But it sort of misses the point. The fact of the matter is, we said to President Aristide, look, you can stay and be killed or you can leave. You make the choice. That's hardly a voluntary departure. ... We've now set up a new standard. You don't have to be a failed government, just a failed leader in our minds and we won't do anything to support and defend you."

Web designers don't lie

Wonkette makes a very good case that Indiana Senator Evan Bayh will be John Kerry's running mate.

After all, just look at the layout of each website side to side: Evan and John. Also note that they use their names as their campaign homepages, not with the -forsenate.com or -2004.com ending, so they can use them over and over again for each campaign. So what you say, they might have hired the same firm. Its one thing to use the same company or same feel, but the same damn template means they are working together.

Why Bayh? Wonkette explains:"Upside: He's a red stater, he's personable, he's handsome, and he's not John Edwards. Downside: Also not the son of a mill worker." True, Bayh is daddy's boy and from what I have heard working at the DLC married to real B*tch who loves throwing her "Senator's Wife" title around.

Evan has been running for VP for about 2 years now, starting with the all-important "serious book" written by the Senator. Several DLCers told me that they tried their best to read the book, but it was just crap, so they just included an excerpt in Blueprint where I used to work. OK, so he is light on substance, who cares if all he is going to be is VP and the DLC needs a new chairman. I mean, they have been begging for this for a long time. The political department knows a putz when they see one. But not as much of one as Kerry is, according to Slate.

Anyway, Democrats wouldn't lose a seat, Governor Joe Kernan (D) would just appoint Indianapolis Mayor Bart Peterson (D) if Kerry-Bayh won and if he won the governor's race ( I would suspect Kernan would appoint himself if he were to lose to Mitch "Bush's B*tch" Daniels.) And hey, if Bayh could take Indiana with him, Bush is toast, even if he keeps Florida and Ohio in his tent. Just try it out: if Kerry-Bayh gets all the Gore states, plus the Hoosier state, they're at 271 right there. That's without NH, FL, OH, WV, AZ, CO, MO or any of the other states that might swing the Democrats' way in November.

The Battle for the Senate (and House)

...just got more interesting. It seems that in Oklahoma, the Republican "nominee-in-waiting" a Oklahoma City mayor named Kirk Humphreys, has been such a flop that ex-Congressman Tom Colburn was "drafted" into running to replace retiring Republican Senator Don Nickels. Congressman Brad Carson, the Democratic nominee-in-waiting, has been polling much better than Humphreys. This is a seat that Democrats actually could pick up, given that Carson is popular and the Governor is a Democrat. All they need is ex-Sooner's coach Barry Switzer to endorse Brad, and he is golden (worked for the Governor).

Alaska looks to be a great race too, with former Governor Tony Knowles running against Lisa Murkowski, the appointed daughter of ex-Senator now Governor Frank M. More than just nepotism, Alaskans are taking it out on Lisa because her dad has been a terrible governor thus far. He even, gasp, raised taxes. Polls show Tony with a narrow (5 points) lead over Lisa. I am sure it will come down to a few hundred votes.

Illinois will be a pick up for the Democrats, but the major question is who will it be? Multimillionaire Blair Hull was cruising to a win with all of his money that he spent (he even paid people to put up lawn signs) until reports came out that he verbally threatened to kill his ex-wife (she was his wife at the time). He even called her a f*cking c*nt. Nice, huh? So now the race may swing to Comptroller Dan Hynes or State Senator Barrack Obama. Hynes is running old-school statewide race, which Obama is running Chicago out. Barrack is a progressive Black man with a cool name (too bad it sounds like Osama) and Hynes is more moderate, although they are both loved by the DLC (the DLC loves winners).

Georgia looks like a Republican pick up, as we can't find a good dog catcher to run.

Louisiana looks like a toss up, as does Florida (both Democratic Seats). South Carolina is looking better than it should considering how conservative the state is. But Inez Tannenbaum is running hard and well (sorry I only cover candidates with cool names). North Carolina is going to be tough but I think we have a good shot with ex-Clinton CoS Erskine Bowles.

Colorado looks to be suddenly a good race. Senator Ben Nighthorse Campbell, the original party switcher (D->R) is in hot water because his staff seems to have taken kickbacks for legislation. Assuming its true, its bad news for the only Native American in Congress: either he knows about it and his criminally liable, or he is a old aloof man that shouldn't be sitting there (plus he's got health issues). A rich, DLC-aligned Think Tank owner, Rutt Bridges, is running for the Democratic nod and a Dean-grassroots type Mike Miles is opposing him in the primaries. I would like either one against Campbell.

On the House side, there is the not-so-secret secret that 2006 looks better. The four year plan is to hedge losses and hope that Dubya is so bad that they win back a lot of seats. The best shot will come in 2012, when redistricting happens again. Of course, there will be no more partisan redistricting if I have my way. But that is a story for a different day.

Notice something different?

Dear Readers,

I have slightly changed the layout and style of this site and I hope you like it slightly better. Also, please note that the comments section is back up. I switched to another free comments provider after the other got all full. After all, I don't want to get on the black list of BOPNews' MattS. ;)

Many thanks to blogExtra for this free comments log. Please try it out, especially during the gay marriage debate on March 11th, when I will be there until the cows come home on the crappy roads they made in Boston and Cambridge.

Post away!

When rumor is fact?

Haitian President Jean-Bertrand Aristide is now on the telephone from the Central African Republic on CNN and is claiming he was forced to resign. He further says his resignation letter was dictated to him by U.S. Embassy officials and that then U.S. Marines "forcibly escorted" him onto a plane. CNN's Cooper Anderson (the guy from the Mole) seems to seriously doubt Aristide's claims, since those truth tellers, the Bush Administration, says so.

Aristide also told the same thing to the Congressional Black Caucus, who have been very vocal in their critique of the President over the weekend and the administration's handling of the situation. So has my man for Secretary of State (assuming Clark is VP) Richard Holbrooke: "By calling for Aristide to leave and then having him leave within a few days, the administration has really taken ownership of the problem. Whether one likes it or not, whether one thinks we're getting too involved or not. ... They cannot walk away from the consequences of their actions" ("This Week," ABC, 2/29).

Is this rumor true? If so, a HUGE blow to US credibility. Why are we such thugs to Haiti? Shouldn't we be helping them instead? After all, Clinton tried to do something with one hand tied behind his back by the GOP congress. Now Bush is holding up his hands while his goons apparently do the dirty work.

$31 million well spent?

According to the end-of-the-year FEC reports, Bush spent a little over $31 million of his $130 war chest in 2003. By now, he has doubtlessly raised much more money and spent more too, by guess he is getting close to the $150 million range, which is obscene considering he has no primary opposition.

Meanwhile, Kerry has about a million or two to his name and 7-8 million in debt ($6M of which is his home loan) and spent about $35 million or so. So, what's Bush spending his money on?

According to a TIME magazine article, Bush has one of the best "grassroots" organizations I have ever heard of (I like to call it "astroturf" when you buy your grassroots support network).

And "what has given the Bush campaign the most confidence during these dark days is its ground organization." While Dems "were attacking, the Bush team says it was quietly laying track." The campaign "has county chairs in all the 1,189 counties in 18 of the target states from 2000. It has held 127 regional training sessions. By June, it will have made 800,000 phone calls to Republicans. Almost 200,000 volunteers have signed on. It boasts that it will be able to run the first 'national precinct campaign,' involving lieutenants in all the 10,020 precincts of every swing state, a level of blanketing usually reserved for smaller campaigns." If you are a "swing-state Republican, lean that way or happen to share an interest like NASCAR or the N.R.A., someone is probably going to knock on your door between now and Election Day. You may already know G.O.P. officials from the church potluck or Little League, but if you don't, they hope to lavish attention on you."

Holy Sh*t. I guess you could argue that Howard Dean blew money on crap like this too, but that was for a primary and for people that he needed to persuade, not religious nuts or gun zombies (of course, there aren't many of those, most gun owners and church goers are normal folks but they definitely lean GOP on issues like gay marriage and gun control). The whole grassroots are going to get all reved up by wedge issues. They're called, by the illustrious Ed Killgore "the 4 Gs:" Guns, Gays, God, and Gas chambers.

These issues are the reason Democrats lose in the South and Middle America. Because if people voted economic interest, Dems would win in a landslide. There aren't enough millionaires out there to vote for the president without his religious conviction (AKA gay marriage amendment). So the question will be, can Bush use these wedge issues to distract swing voters long enough for them to forget about 2 costly, badly run wars, 3 million lost jobs, a $1 trillion swing in the federal budget deficit, exploding health care costs, and a string of broken promises to the moon and back.

Let's work to open people's eyes to the facts: No one is going to take your guns away from you, unless you are a criminal. No one is going to force your church to marry gay people, unless they want you. No one is going to tell state's they can't execute heinous criminals, unless your state bans it. But some one is going to cost you jobs; some one will cost you more money than the pithy tax cut he gave you in higher state fees, health care costs, interest payments, etc.; someone is going to make you pretend to be Canadian when you travel abroad; someone is going to make this country more divided than ever; someone is willing to go to any length to win reelection lives or constitution be damned. Ladies and Gentlemen, that some one is George W. Bush.

Objects in rear view mirror may be closer than they appear, but they are still behind you

Senator Johnnie-come-lately Edwards finally got around to attacking Senator John Kerry yesterday, when no one was watching (hopefully because Dan Rather made an ass of himself again). Some say it is too late. But others think the "Washington" attack lines won't work when the attacker is himself a sitting senator. Details, Details.

Finally, some one at the Boston Globe put down in words why I don't like Kerry and thing he is the worse choice of nominee, lack of political courage. The closer: "At the age of 25, John Kerry's courage was indisputable. Now, at age 60, it is more or less undetectable." LA Weekly says its because Kerry always wanted to be an insider and never really was. You really are an outsider when you go to St. Paul's in NH, Yale (and Skull 'n Bones), and marry two millionaire heiresses. Must be tough. [if you can't figure it out, I don't buy that argument]

Tomorrow millions of people vote, and if the polls are to be believed Kerry wins most, if not all, the contests. Edwards says he will stay in for at least another week, but I almost wonder why he would bother if he can't win. Maybe it is because Kerry is annoyed with Edwards, despite their LA knoodling, and won't pick him for VP. Latest rumor: ex-Sen. Max Cleland (GA) will be it.

Let's hope the 25 year old big-chinned Kerry shows up, and the cautious 60 year old Senator from Massachusetts disappears.

More fuel for the gay-baiting fire

Just when conservatives thought that an outbreak of gay marriage in Massachusetts, San Francisco, and DuVall Co., New Mexico were on their way to be contained and even squelched, New Paltz, New York joined the list of places in America where gay marriage licenses were being issued. [Just where is New Paltz? Why its "located not far from the Hudson River and the Shawangunk Mountains, a ridge of rugged and rocky cliffs popular with rock climbers."-- Thanks Times!]

NY Governor George "I want to be president in 2008" Pataki is thinking about how to stop this unruly mayor. "This law states that a marriage is between a man and a woman," Pataki told the Times, according to a transcript provided by his office. "Our attorneys are talking with the Health Department and with the attorney general's office to see what steps they may determine are appropriate."

In addition to New Paltz, the mayor of Schenectady, NY was also considering allowing same-sex marriage ceremonies, according the Times piece. Man alive, soon those Gay people will have full rights under the 14th Amendment, run for the hills! They might make responsible parents!

WaterBoy, staring Denny Hastert

In a classic Bush move, Dubya says he wants to give the 9/11 Commission (something he has tried to trip up for a long time, particularly by naming secret monger Henry "War Crimes" Kissinger to be its head at first) 60 more days to reach its conclusions, but he is doing absolutely nothing to urge Hastert to extend the deadline. Many folks with a brain would call this "good cop, bad cop" with Hastert taking the heat for the president via his letter to Bush saying "no dice". Fine, then postpone the panel until after the election, like Bush's WMD intelligence failure "investigation;" 9/11 widows are furious at the stonewalling, and you should be too.

In other House scandals, Roll Call reports that the FBI is investigating Rep. Nick Smith's allegations of bribery during the Medicare Reform Bill vote. Although
Nick has since changed his tune somewhat, the story of a $100,000 campaign donation to his son Bradley's (Nick is retiring and Bradley is running for his seat) campaign in exchange for a yes vote on the "$400 billion" prescription drug bill (turned out to be $565, thanks to the White House finally coming clean). Otherwise, he was told, be prepared for a stiff GOP primary challenge against your son. Nick voted no anyway.

Meanwhile in Massachusetts...

Resigned Senator Cheryl Jacques (who now heads the Human Rights Campaign) Chief of Staff Angus McQuilken is the Democrat running against a ho-hum Republican for her seat (my boss said, "he's one of those guys that is just there."). If Angus wins, that is one more vote against any amendment to the constitution, if he loses, the tally stays the same.

According to the Beacon Hill Insider, Angus, should he win, will have trouble getting seated in time to vote in the Constitutional Convention. That's because Mitt "the Sh*t" Romney gets to decide when to swear him in, plus there is that minor detail of certifying the election. If it is close, the winner may not be decided in time. Meanwhile, The Onion makes fun of the whole thing.

Ever Mr. Serious Furrowed (with or without Botox), MA Sen. John Kerry loudly said he supports a civil unionamendmentnt to the MA Constitution, telling the Globe "I think that you need to have civil union. That's my position." Wow something clear from the Senator. Now some readers have beedisappointeded by this latest Kerry-finger-in-the-wind leadership. This is his way of batting down the "Massachusetts Liberal" label anytime they try to bring it up. Of course, the GOP now has settled on Flip-Flopper, which Kerry dismisses by pointing out all of Bush's flops and broken promises. While this is not a bad tactic, it failed to directly address the question (denying the truth won't do any good either). A better bet would be to say, "Over the course of my long career in public service [from county prosecutor to US Senator], I have come to believe different things at different times. I have changed my views as I have grown older, and wiser."

Oh yeah, the debate!

CNN/LA Times sat Kerry and Edwards next to each other. The way they placed the camera made Democrats, or at least me, want more and more for this to be the ticket. I expect there will be pressure of Kerry to name Edwards.

There was good-natured ribbing and slight differences shown. As Kerry said about Edwards:"I know he's looking for some differences because you need them" I thought Edwards proved he is a good man who knows his issues and is more charismatic anempatheticic sounding. Kerry proved that he is tough, CNN's Larry "Womanizer" King asked Kerry "A person who kills a 5-year-old should live?" Kerry: "My instinct is to want to strangle that person with my own hands"

Kerry just worries me. He seems too liberal, too wishy-washy, and too old-Washington Democrat to win. I wanted Clark, but I prefer Edwards over Kerry. Kerry-Edwards is a great ticket. Too bad he will never do it.

Nader wanted to be Dean's VP

On Jerry Springer's blog, Mike Ford writes: "....For the last 6 months or so I was a senior advisor to Howard Dean.

"'Bout three months ago Ralph Nader and his entourage walked into our Vermont headquarters off the street to 'dialogue'.

"He was quite impressive intellectually and the firmness of his vision was also impressive. At the time of the visit, Howard was still the front runner and the Nader entourage made a blatant pitch for a Nader Vice Presidential nomination. [own emphasis added]

"The point of all this is to say that the only thing that impressed me more than Nader's brain was his outsized ego. [own emphasis added] Got to say, that's what seems to be the driver here and it's more about his personal agenda and, I think, about that huge ego rather than beating Bush. Who died and made you King Ralph? To each her own, EH? What do you think? "

Kos backs up this source saying "Mike Ford is the guy that ran all of Jerry Springer's early campaigns (for mayor and councilmember of Cincinnati). Lest the "Springer" connection make you skeptical, he's also Joe Trippi's best friend and comrade in arms. They have worked together on a slew of presidential campaigns in the past. So the source is solid. And his take on Nader is as well. "

So much for the corporate lines of Nader; he just wants power, or attention. And we're not going to give him either.

Three states hold a primary, and no one cares. Plus: Bush is too right-wing for even Tom DeLay

According to Yahoo! News Kerry easily won all 3 states (UT, ID, and HI) while Kucinich's visit to Hawaii paid off with a second place win and 6 delagates. Congratulations Dennis J!

Speaking of nice trips and nice hotels, Rev. Al Sharpton is in trouble for "excessive campaign donations, the way in which he reported his debt, and why he didn't itemize large payments made to him personally." The NY Post says that, "Two payments - one for $21,200.87 and the other for $799.13 - are simply made out to Sharpton and are not itemized as is required." The FEC previously fined him for accounting shenanigans when he was still in his "exploratory" phase. Al has been in the news about his pricey hotels ($1,000 a night) when his campaign debt is as much as Dean's ($500,000).

Meanwhile Edwards is annoyed that Bush didn't pick on him in his first speech. "It isn't quite the two-man race that Sen. John Edwards envisioned," said the Charolette Observer. "So Edwards updated his line Tuesday in acknowledging Bush's jabs at Democratic rival John Kerry. 'I have got a message today for somebody in Washington,' Edwards told supporters in Atlanta. 'And that message is this -- Not so fast, George Bush. George Bush doesn't get to pick our nominee, and he doesn't get to decide what this election is about.'" But Edwards really didn't want to talk about (and neither did Kerry, who is holding a big lead in NY and CA) was Gay marriage. Both support civil unions but don't want to alientate conservative swing state voters. Speaking of swing states, Florida Senator Bob Graham is endorsing John Kerry (say VP three times fast).

Both Kerry and Edwards argeed that Bush's constitutional amendment was a terrible idea. It is really a sad statement that the man who claimed he was "a uniter, not a divider" is taking up the most divisive issue of our time and playing politics with it to get elected. BOPNews' Matt Stoller gives a good summary of the blogsphere's opinion.

Even his own staff private admit that there is no chance of it actually passing. They just think they need to energize their base who is mad at them about things like immgration reform, fiscal irresponsibility, and other issues near and dear to true conservative hearts. The more I think about Bush's move, the more angry and sad I get. Even Right-wing reactionary US House Majority Leader Rep. Tom DeLay told the Times "This is so important we are not going to take a knee-jerk reaction to this," Mr. DeLay said that, although he loves Bush's "Moral Leadership," "We are going to look at our options and be deliberate about what solutions we may suggest."

How could people be so stupid as to vote for him last time? I understand why conservatives would, but moderates...man what were you thinking?

Notes from the field: Edwards Meetup

Tonight I went to an Edwards meetup in the heart of liberal Cambridge: Central Square. You could literally throw a rock and hit the Dean Headquarters, which solicited me for my vote in the Boston Common at 5. "Vote for Dean: he's still on the ballot." (Great slogan, kid).

So the Meetup was moved from a restaurant to an Elks lodge because there was about 50 people there, many of whom where former Dean people, a couple former Clark supporters and 5 people from New Hampshire. Can you imagine? New Hampshirites usually don't even bother to put up a sign, let alone drive into Cambridge for a meetup months after their primary. He really is a snake charmer. Anyway, the vibe in the room was that of a rally with a much smaller crowd. The biggest campaign person they could get was a guy that went dinner with the Senator in 2002 (and he is on the National Finance Committee and fellow Trial Lawyer).

Before I got there, I got accosted by those crazy Kucinich people who failed to tell me that he would actually be at the church on Church Street tonight. Of course, no sightings of Kerry folks, except at work where Representatives are compelled to wear buttons and I get calls from US Rep. Markey's staff to do fundraising calls.

Anyway, back to Edwards. 20-30% of those there were ex-Deanies, including the guy that showed the DVD they handed out in NH (of a town hall meeting, rough camera work guys). Another third were BC/BU folks who had marched some troops over there. They were trying to get us all excited about trying to get delegates in every congressional district (AKA 15%) with excessive group clapping. Feels a bit big brothery the way we had to clap for everything people said.

Somethings did impress me: they told us to never say anything negative, especially about Kerry. "John Kerry is a great, but John Edwards is better. Kerry is a great Senator ... and I want him to stay our Senator." This was said over and over again. We are to keep expectations low so as to exceed them and get press (the Bart Simpson strategy). We will get on the news if we are holding a sign doing "Viz" as they call it. Damn they are hip. Oh yeah, no swearing in the sketchy Elks Lodge where the meetup was held.

Bush protects his right flank

Under pressure from the Christian Conservative Wing of the party and that crazy right wing part of his mind (not the "I must win at all costs" part), Bush has decided to push for a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage. I guess Karl Rove thought this one would win them votes, even if all the other bull didn't. Bush is also worried about AL ex-Supreme Court Justice Roy (Mr. 10 Commandments) Moore running for president in a third party. As Slate's Timothy Noah points out, Moore is far more dangerous to Bush than Nader is to Kerry or Edwards.

Meanwhile, the Times seems to be under the false impression that Rep. Musgrave's amendment is a moderate position. Sorry, nope, it would enshire discrimination in all venues, like housing, just ask Yale Law professor Jack Balkin. Conservative Andrew Sullivan is livid. Liberal Altrios is also very upset.

I am looking forward to all those emails from Red States asking my boss to sign on to the Federal Amendment even though my boss isn't a member of congress (geniuses) and voted in favor of gay rights. "I support President Bush, and you should too..." these letters write themselves. Joy.

Bush to Edwards: It's over

In his first real campaign speech of 2004 (besides the ones at all the fundraisers) to GOP governors at the Governor's Conference in DC, Bush decided to take on John Kerry, not John Edwards. "The other party's nomination battle is still playing out. The candidates are an interesting group, with diverse opinions. For tax cuts, and against them. For NAFTA, and against NAFTA. For the Patriot Act, and against the Patriot Act. In favor of liberating Iraq, and opposed to it. And that's just one senator from Massachusetts." The "this guy flip-flops" attack line is much better than the Mass. Liberal one because it is undeniably true. Kerry can say he has taken firm positions, but I don't think that passes the laugh test. Every vote he has taken he wonders off from when it is politically expedient. The best example of course, is Iraq. He said he voted for it when Saddam was captured and when Baghdad fell, but all the other times, he says he was duped and really wanted voted for Bush to go to the UN. At least that is what I can decipher.

Meanwhile, it looks like Bush is attacking the one who will win. John Kerry leads John Edwards 56-24% in a new Los Angeles Times CA poll. At the same time, Kerry has a slightly bigger lead over Edwards in NY (58% to 22%). Together, that is bad news for Johnny Millworker. I haven't seen any Ohio or Georgia polling, but he loses CA and NY like this, he will absolutely need wins in the other two states to even pretend he can win.

Edwards "stumbled" yesterday, according to the LA Times "when asked about looming European trade sanctions." Edwards: "I'm not sure I even know what you're talking about" (I'll give you a hint-- Bush's ill conceived steel tariffs). Also a bad move, The Center for Disability Rights noticed that "Edwards didn't have sign language interpreters and instead patted the heads of people in wheelchairs" in his Rochester, NY speech.

Quote of the Day

"As one who grew up on the receiving end of insensitive remarks, I should have chosen my words better" -- U.S. Education Secretary Rod Paige, apologizing for calling the NEA a "terrorist organization."

This from a guy who was in Charge of the "Huston Miracle," where test scores and drop out rates miraculously revered, thanks to Enron-style accounting (students who didn't make the cut where not allowed to take the test. Students who dropped out were classified as "transferred" or "moved"). The man can't even show his face in GOP stronghold Utah because of the No Child Left Behind Act.

The Bushies: every last one of them is a corrupt, lying SOB who is slowly trying to ruin our country in their respective fields

Edwards-Dean 2004?

Edwards "stepped up his courtship" of Howard Dean supporters and maybe the Doctor himself, calling Dean "a powerful voice for change" and "somebody I believe has changed the face of politics forever in America." True on both counts Mr. E. Even ex-Dean supporter Kos is in Edwards' corner now. The ex-Deaniacs started their own website to this effect.

Could the Lawyer team up with the Doctor to get his supporters? Could be a hellava team. I don't know if Dean is readdy to play second fiddle but he is a talented politican who made some big time mistakes he might never live down. Like he is in $500,000 of debt now. He raised over $50 million (my guess was like 44) yet he is half a million in the hole? So much for ballanced budgets. Where did all of that spending get him? 0-17. Then again Bush has spent $46 Million against nobdy. What the hell are the doing; convincing his daughter to vote Republican?

Meanwhile, it looks like money can buy you love in the land of Lincoln. A Chicago Tribune/WGN-TV poll on the Illinois Senate Race, Investment banker Blair Hull (who has already spent tens of millions of his own money) won 24%, next was state Sen. Barack Obama with 15%; Compt. Dan Hynes with 11%; Cook Co. Treas. Maria Pappas with 9% and ex-Chicago school board chief Gery Chico with 5%. Among GOPers, teacher/ex-investment banker Jack Ryan had 30%, followed by dairy owner Jim Oberweis with 12%. Good news for Dems: this Jack Ryan wasn't in any Tom Clancy novels and has the same name as the last corrupt Governor of IL.

The most selfish man in America

No it is not Ken Lay, or any of Bush's other friends, who are pretty open about their greed. The man of the year for this dubious honor is Ralph Nader, who despite costing Gore the election in 2000 and having absolutely no support for his run this time, is running again in 2004 as an independent. He told Tim Russert this is because even the nutty Green Party, who he ran into the ground last time, doesn't want him on their ticket.

In 2000, he got 2.7%, way less than Perot got either time, but yet it was enough to swing New Hampshire and Florida to Bush. Just think of all the things that would have different had Ralph decided to be a cabinet member of Gore's White House (EPA director or something) instead. No war in Iraq, the war on terror would going much better, our economy would be better, and we would have allies.

Instead, Nader lives in the fantasy world where he things there is this huge mandate for a candidate like him and that he will either win or his issues will be so pervasive that they will have to be address, ala Perrot and the deficit in 1992. Guess what, Ralph, you are about as clueless as your namesake on the Simpsons.

No money will go to you. Since you are running as an independent, and not with a fringe party, you will have to raise much more money to even appear on the ballot in many states, money that nobody will give you. Sure Kucinich has raised some decent amounts of money, but he is still in the race, precisely to drain your potential resources (sorry Dennis). Democrats and Liberals are united in wanting to beat Bush, they won't be fooled again to vote for you or volunteer or even give you money.

Over and over again, I read stories from former Nader voters or supporters who say "Ralph Don't Run" and although "I don't regret voting for him in 2000, I won't do it again." This time, it is painfully obvious that there is a difference between the two parties.

One clearly cares more about clean elections, clean environment, reigning in corporate power, providing health care for citizens, and all the other issues you care about than the other. Independents, liberals, and dissolutioned Democrats know from experience what a Bush White House is like, they know that we can't let him get another 4 year in power.

For God's sakes, your old public advocacy groups like Public Citizen, lost 20% of its funding after 2000, specifically due to your run. No one wants you to run except Karl Rove (and you)! Can't you see that it would hurt all the causes you care about? People won't return your calls any more, your influence has waned. Your "exploratory committee" can't release its' address because the staff fears for thier lives. Isn't that a sign, like Mel Gibson's actor for the Passion of the Christ getting struck by lighting?

Asked if he would withdraw if he concluded his candidacy would merely ensure President Bush's re-election, Nader told Meet the Press, "When and if that eventuality occurs, you can invite me back on the program and I'll give you the answer." OK, now come back and answer the question.

Potential VP candidate and current Governor of New Mexico Bill Richardson explained Nader's motiviation better than I could:

"It's his personal vanity because he has no movement. Nobody's backing him," Richardson said Sunday in advance of Nader's announcement.

"The Greens aren't backing him. His friends urge him not to do it. It's all about himself," Richardson told "Fox News Sunday".

"Now, Ralph's made some great contributions to consumer issues over the years, but clearly it's not going to help us," he said. "I don't think he'll have a sizable impact, but it's terrible if he goes ahead because it's about him. It's about his ego. It's about his vanity and not about a movement that supposedly he headed for many years very effectively."