The Economy Restored Several Times Destroyed by Tea Party Right Wing Mob Opinion
David Dewhurst enters the US Texas Senate campaign last month with "Tell Obama To Stop Waging War Against Texas." How can these Texas politicians be so misinformed? I say, David Dewhurst, stop giving Obama credit for my hard work!
Suffering the web for hours to find a Tea Party Sympathizer, I found an interesting article that tells the tale of Tea Party big lie, "The second response is purely political-and Orwellian. It is to repeat ad nauseum the Big Lie that this is the Tea Party downgrade, attributable lock, stock, and barrel to the failure of the Tea Party caucus in Congress to even countenance taxes as a part of any debt ceiling deal."
The author claims the credit rating was based on bad math calculations by the Obama Administration; however, memories are short and I wrote a valid justified complaint to the Office of the Inspector General April 2009 with concerns that the Tea Party is a Right Wing Extremist Group with one objective, to remove the first black president of the United States of America. In fact, I was specific with my concerns again last summer when our infrastructure fell apart with the BP Oil Spill, the main attraction based on discriminatory acts of hatred and narcissism in a post as follows:
In April 2009, Rick Perry succeeded from the Union founding an organized rebellion (paid for by the state) by posting the 'Stop' web page instructing all Texas employees to group together [Those that did not co-operate faced termination from their job] and rebel against the Constitution of the United States as members of the "Tea Party" rebellion, targeting not just the new presidential administration but the Honorable Barack Obama personally.
Rick Perry and his cronies, wealthy corporate owners and investors have just declared "War on the EPA" a statement just mentioned verbally in the state of Texas by a private citizens is enough to be harassed, arrested, and/or jailed by Law Enforcement for an unknown length of time waiting for Terrorist Threat charges to be collaborated by Texas District Attorneys.
It is unimaginable the Governor of Texas would publicly "Declare War" against regulating authorities that would of prevented the Gulf disaster. Employee Whistle Blower Postings At These Operations Have The Maranda Act Printed On The Top Of The Federal Document. This is why oil clean-up workers would not talk to the press and the root cause to all the oil fires because the employees cannot say anything about safety "You Have The Right To Remain Silent, Anything You Say Can And Will Be Use Against You In A Court Of Law."
The Gulf Disaster investigation shows hard evidence, a repeat of special interest favors that also caused the Texas BP refinery explosion in 2005 as Perry justifies his words by stating "Obama has declared War on Texas." The 911 Patriot Act is clearly unconstitutional if the rule of law is not applied universally to those that Govern (Rick Perry) and those that are governed too.
The state of Texas has no record of any virtuous acts other than those good deeds provided by private citizens and organizations in and out of the State of Texas. Over the last eight years, government agencies such as the EPA, Transportation Department, and Office of Civil Rights have tried every form of diplomacy to protect property and lives and seldom pursue violations by court of law against the state of Texas.
Some good local examples are Kelly AFB which is an active EPA Toxic Super Fund, our farm burn 3 times in a five year period due to faulty oil well heads (fire from the lack of routine safety maintenance and inspections example BP), and the mass exodus of disabled students from the university of Texas because of hostile policies that segregate the disabled population from all other campus community members.
Most Texans believe that Perry's coalition is made of the few wealthy and corrupt State investors that have no regard for their fellow man or loss of human life. Countless examples of Perry's special interest policies such as the recent big pharmaceutical mortality spike of 88,000 deaths [Merck Vioxx], Vaccine legislation support by special interest cash linked to autism, drug legislation doughnut hole that deprives elderly for necessary medicines, antiquated DEA laws that aid the illegal drug trade, and finance terrorism.
In addition, burning fuel farms and oil well heads where cash buys safety certificates, academic payoffs justifying cheaper unsafe manufacturing processes, a "No Child Left Behind Law" that has filled Texas prisons with those very children the law intended to protect ad infinitum. Texas Governor Rick Perry defended his action by sarcastically apologizing for his anti-ethical behavior, to him justified his actions.
Ethics: Ethics (also known as moral philosophy) is a branch of philosophy that addresses questions about morality-that is, concepts such as good and bad, noble and ignoble, right and wrong, justice, and virtue.
Anti-ethics: categories of good and evil do not apply
But why should Right Wing Extremist have a concern that does not concern themselves? The united States Constitution does not imply or express that fellow citizens should have a concern of the welfare of others as Rick Perry recently justified his "Anti-ethical practices" which is a true indicator that he and his coalition do not understand the term or value of 'ethics' or the destruction caused by unethical practices guarded against by the United States Constitution:
"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America"
• in Order to form a more perfect Union: "to improve the general well-being of the country (McGire)"
• establish Justice: "Justice is the concept of moral rightness based on ethics, rationality, law, natural law, religion, fairness, or equity, along with the punishment of the breach of said ethics (wiki)."
• insure domestic Tranquility: "One of the main goals of the Convention, then, was to ensure the federal government had powers to squash rebellion and to smooth tensions between states (US Constitution)."
• provide for the common defense: "The primary responsibility of the government of the United States of America; to ensure the nation is protected from threats both inside and outside the country, such as terrorism, war, subterfuge, etc. (Answers)"
• promote the general Welfare: All peoples of the United States rich, poor, health, sick, young, or old
Yes, empirical facts point to the struggle to get America back on its feet was defeated by Mob Tea Party Right Wing Extremist that is "political-and Orwellian" that abused the 911 patriot Act at the state level with Rick Perry's Executive Order Declaring himself God, creating a police state that created a strong market in the first quarter by inside trading of Domestic Surveillance, Security Private Firms, and Manufactures of such devices; the symptoms that were not felt until the "Orwellian Lie" news break that the 911 Patriot Act had been breach with security devices that now are used by the news media to get the inside scope to victims of the disaster that the 911 Patriot act was supposed to "Keep Us Safer."
Texans have been screaming at the top of their lungs disputing the notion that the wealthy few create jobs, and can be clearly demonstrated to be false by the failed Rick Perry Tax Plan with a warning from the Texas Comptroller's Office detailing in 2006 a projected FYI budget in 2010 a 23,000,000,000 deficit, which is perfect math.
As predicted by the Obama administration and It is a fact, the quick fix is to Repeal the Bush Tax Relief Plan to the wealthy few who built their wealth on the backs on ordinary middle class citizens.
Compounding the problem of the debt is that we are at war declared by George Bush on Iraq as Osama bin Laden, a CIA operative, followed detailed plans that were given him, so our intelligence could devise a plan to counter such attacks.
Unfortunately, Osama was successful with the attack on New York by duping our intelligence agency. He should of been arrested for his first terrorist bombing during the Clinton Administration which would of made the attack on New York impossible and avoided the deaths of 4,000 American citizens.
My family is a victim of one his first high tech bombings in Riyadh Saudi Arabia November 13, 1993, and still wonder with the prudence and tip toeing done around the Osama bin Laden clan while it was a known fact, he attacked the United States and continued to do so before the twin towers were destroyed killing near 4000 people. [Conspiracy or stupidity? Your choice]
The attack on New York mortally spike is small in comparison to the millions of deaths by deregulation of Big Pharmaceutical, conflicts of Interest with political leaders, and manufacturing of products that still kill thousands daily such as asbestos.
Let's us not forget the mass shooting on U.S. Campuses that were in fact Orwellian Big Brother protection of the wealthy few, that could of been avoided if George Bush did not obstruct justice and cull professionals from the justice department.
It does not amaze me that Texas seemed to dance with impunity as if they had a copy of the hit list of professional District Attorneys that seemed to contradict Republican ideologies or wrote the list themselves blessed by Senator Cornyn.
The best indicator of economic health is the quality of care a State or Country provides for those that cannot care for themselves, and the evidence was there long before the election of Barack Obama, as seen as the abuses in Texas Protective Institutions of beatings, rape, and murder.
Graduates of these same institutions were shipped over state lines to slave farms as so called employers pocketed their social security checks while they lived in scalar. Not long after the investigation, Governor Rick Perry transfers a multimillion dollar budget from disabled care to Digital Ally for an x-ray machine that can penetrate metal to catch the human trafficking of slaves which are illegal Hispanics crossing the borders, while U.S. citizens were deported from the state of Texas over state lines in open public to slave farms in Missouri.
Amazingly, all this could be turned around in a matter of months if the Tea Party, or let's be fair, the Right Wing co-operated and supported the executive branch in a time of crisis. The Obama Administration saved the U.S. from destruction on several repeated occasions, only to be defamed by Right Wing Mob hatred!
I understand that you do not understand the value of ethics, but how about a little patriotism instead of conspiring with Right Wing Extremist such as the John Birch Society or banning together in the name of God as political day of prayer which is the "political-and Orwellian Big Lie" to 30,000 innocent people that was preplanned, premeditated, and orchestrated by the Republican party by instructing Perry to do so!
Consider a little empathy even if you have to fake compassion, now that doomsday is not just knocking on the foreclosed houses of the middle class, but making the wealthy few jump ship to off shore accounts, while the sting of consequences of Tea Party Hatred is now in your own living rooms as the result of your Mob Forced Intrusion on Congressional Legislators!
Now David Dewhurst Is Crying "Tell Obama To Stop Waging War On Texas." Don't blame Obama, give me and other Texans full credit for taking the time to report the legislatures illegal activity to the Justice Department including the EPA! That's right, I did it Dewhurst, so sue me!
If Right Wing Extremism is not addressed by the Justice Department now, history will repeat as it did on November 13, 1963 by the detonation of a dirty bomb that even shook the foundation of resident Texas Republican conspirators living in San Antonio - you know who you are.
Texas Right Wing Extremist Plan To Assassinate The President 1963 Set Off Nuclear Dirty Bomb:
Who defended the biggest funds on the defense to protect themselves that cost more to watch us than to care for us - as you have stated in your article, "Would Rather Starve Than Feed" as follows:
It Doesn't Take a Rating Agency to Tell Which Way the Debt Grows By Craig Pirrong Aug 8, 2011, 4:02 AM Author's Website
"The second response is purely political-and Orwellian. It is to repeat ad nauseum the Big Lie that this is the Tea Party downgrade, attributable lock, stock, and barrel to the failure of the Tea Party caucus in Congress to even countenance taxes as a part of any debt ceiling deal."
"The Tea Party doesn't consider raising taxes to be a constructive part of any effort to address the problem because its members believe that spending is the problem, not the way the spending is financed. They believe that the government is too big, it spends too much, it spends badly, and that raising taxes just extends, but only for a little while, the life of Destructive Leviathan-whom they would rather starve than feed."
Oddly, there is still time for the Right Wing Mob that defeated every progressive step to restore America, to join the rest of us and support the actions of the Obama administration, even if you do not favor him, because it is no longer an ethical concern beyond your understanding. The doomsday riders are now at your front doors as a hazard to yourselves and family, no longer just a patriotic concern for the future of a collapsing United States economy!
by Texas Threatened My Family And Now Texas Pays The Price. You have yet to pay the price and I still have a full deck of cards to play and nothing to lose! Pay Up of Shut Up David Dewhurst! And stop giving Obama credit for my hard work!
Texas College Democrats Applaud Senate Vote to Repeal "Don't Ask, Don't Tell"
Austin, TX - Texas College Democrats President Ryan Lofton Payne released the below statement today, following a vote in the U.S. Senate to move forward on critical legislation that would repeal "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." The legislation would allow Americans to serve in the military regardless of their sexual orientation.
"The Senate did the right thing today for our country and our military by voting to move forward with legislation that would repeal the outdated and discriminatory 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' policy. President Obama pledged to overturn this policy when he campaigned for office, and today, US Senators cast critical votes to move toward achieving this goal. The repeal of 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell,' which is supported overwhelmingly by the American people, will ensure that brave men and women who wish to serve in the military can do so regardless of their sexual orientation. It is the right thing to do, will be a boost to our national security, and would be a major victory for equal rights in America."
Other members of the Texas College Democrats board had this to say:
"The repeal of 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' is a victory for all Americans who believe no soldier, or anyone for that matter, should have to hide who they are."
-Vice President Garrett Hall
"Our military exists to protect our nation and all its citizens. It's only fair that our armed forces reflect the American spirit of unity, equality, and tolerance."
-Secretary Oscar Boleman
"This is great news! It's about time! This is a historic step towards an inevitable full breadth of equality in all facets of life for gays in America."
-Development Director Dallen Terrell
"Finally! The repeal of DADT was long overdue."
-Programs Director Dancey Glover
"By ending this unjust law, patriotic Americans in uniform will no longer be discharged for being true to themselves and living lives of integrity. This is a triumph not only for civil rights but also for national defense."
-Communications Director Alexander Clark
"The repeal of DADT marks a turn in LGBT relations. Just a half decade ago, the Senate was voting whether to discriminate against the LGBT community in our Constitution and now at the end of the decade we see our military become truly open to all Americans."
-Political Affairs Director David de la Fuente
"The repeal of DADT, which has cost this nation hundreds of millions of dollars stands as a true victory for fiscal conservatism within our federal government and further allows our nation to stand as champions for our brave, selfless men and women in uniform."
-Membership Director Kendall Scudder
"This courageous action by the Senate allows so many to continue to serve their nation. DADT repeal continues our nation's tradition of expanding equality for all."
-President Emeritus Andy Jones
The fight for civil rights, a struggle that continues, will no longer include this one. While we celebrate, there is still much to do.
Just when you thought the U.S. Senate couldn't do any less for clean energy and the environment than it's (not) done so far, we now face the real possibility of what would amount to a "stop-work order" on the 40-year-old, wildly successful (e.g., studies finding benefits outweighing costs at a 40:1 ratio), Clean Air Act.
That's right: believe it or not, Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) is moving ahead with a sequel to Sen. Lisa Murkowski's nefarious attempt, earlier this summer, to gut the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)'s power to protect the public health from dangerous pollutants, including harmful greenhouse gases. Just as bad, Rockefeller's proposal would keep America addicted to oil and other old, polluting energy technologies, while delaying or derailing our switch to a clean, prosperous energy economy.
Essentially, what Rockefeller is proposing would tell the EPA – at least for two years, although we know that justice delayed is often justice denied! - that it has to be asleep at the switch, that it must not hold polluters accountable, that it must look the other way whole Big Oil and Big Coal trash the environment. Is that the lesson the Senate learned from the Gulf of Mexico disaster? Really?
Fortunately, not everyone is so clueless as the U.S. Senate appears to be right now. For instance, in yesterday's Politico, two energy investors – one Democrat, one Republican – explained what's at stake in clear, compelling language.
We are not experts in vote counting or horse trading. But we do know how investors and markets will respond if Congress ultimately fails to put a market-based price on carbon. The response from capital will be brutal: Money will flow to places like China, Europe and India — and U.S. jobs will go with it.
The path to creating more U.S. jobs is simple: Pass legislation that eliminates uncertainty and levels the playing field, and investors will fund projects that create good jobs here at home. Rules bring certainty, certainty spurs investment, and investment creates jobs.
[...]
Take it from investors: Removing the uncertainty, and taking a more thoughtful approach to energy policy by putting a market price on carbon, can bring home new investments and jobs — and ensure that America leads the clean energy economy.
Instead, it now looks like the Senate not only won't be moving us forwards, but instead will be trying to move us significantly – and disastrously - backwards. What's truly stunning about this possibility is that, right now, the science of climate change is clearer and more disturbing than ever. Heat waves are getting worse, the ice caps are shrinking faster than ever, and scientists are telling us that the world is setting new temperature records almost every month, every year, and every decade. In addition, the results of our insatiable thirst for fossil fuels were demonstrated starkly and tragically, both in a West Virginia coal mine as well as in the Gulf of Mexico, on TV screens all across America in recent months. As if all this isn't bad enough, we also could run out of water.
The American people know this situation can't go on. In fact, recent polls show large majorities supporting an energy bill that would "[l]imit pollution, invest in domestic energy sources and encourage companies to use and develop clean energy...by charging energy companies for carbon pollution in electricity or fuels like gas." In other words, this is a case where good policy – limiting greenhouse gas emissions, enhancing our national security, safeguarding public health, jumpstarting a clean energy revolution – and good politics – strong poll results for doing just that - appear to align. Yet, the U.S. Senate appears ready to ignore both good policy and good politics, and actually move to make matters worse by gutting the EPA and letting polluters like BP off the hook.
Don’t let them do it. Call your Senators right now and tell them "hell no" to the "Let Polluters Pollute with Impunity Act." Also, while you’re at it, call the White House and tell President Obama that, if such a measure reaches his desk, he will veto it – no ifs, ands, or buts.
Take action today for a cleaner, stronger, and more sustainable future. Join NRDC Action Fund on Facebook and Twitter and stay up-to-date on the latest environmental issues and actions you can take to help protect our planet.
The climate bill blame game has begun. When I first started writing this post about the so-called death of the climate bill, I literally pointed the finger at just about everyone, including myself. The anger poured out, and I was frank in my assessment as well as unforgiving in the motives behind this latest setback.
After I was done with my self-loathing tantrum, the kids ran in the door from camp and I was swept up in the lovely reality of my family's banter. It is summer, so the pace in our home is a bit more relaxed in the evening. We aren't quite as quick to rush through dinner, toss the kids in a bath, and then march them off to bed. Ice cream and extra cuddles are relished, and I am reminded each year at this time why I do this job.
Later, after progeny were tucked in, I went back to my draft blog post to spruce it up. I reread my rage, disappointment, and irrational ramblings and was embarrassed. And I asked myself "What good is all this blame going to do?"
At the end of the day, it is my kids - and your kids - who lose when we implode. If you think kids have a lot to say about their parents now on Dr. Phil, can you imagine what our children will say in 50 years should we fail to get our act together?
The country should be ready for this. The facts are on our side. As we witness the worst industry-caused environmental catastrophe in our history, the worst coal mining disaster in 40 years, and sweat through the hottest first 6 months of any year on record, it is clear that there's never been a more urgent time to move forward with a smart clean energy and climate plan.
Unfortunately, the politicians just aren't there. At every juncture during this debate, a minority, led by the Republican leadership and supported by a few impressionable (I might say pathetic) Democrats, has obstructed the opportunity to solve America's energy problems, preferring to leave the worst polluters and the big petro-dictators in control of our energy policy, while tax-payers are forced to pay for their messes.
Oopsy... there goes that blame again. Let's focus on what we can do next.
Hope is not lost. Of course, the closer we get to the midterm elections, the more challenging passing a bill becomes. Still, it's not impossible. In fact, the Senate has passed almost every single bedrock environmental law in the fall of an election year or in the "lame duck" session following an election. Here are just a few examples:
o Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) - 1996 Amendments: 8/6/96
o Food Quality Protection Act: 8/3/96
o Energy Policy Act of 1992: 10/24/92
o Clean Air Act of 1990: 11/15/90
o SDWA - 1986 Amendments: 6/19/86
o CERCLA (Superfund): House 9/23/80, Senate 11/24/80, POTUS 12/11/80
o Resource Conservation & Recovery Act (RCRA): 10/21/76
o Toxic Substances & Control Act (TSCA): 10/11/76
o SDWA: 12/16/74
o Clean Water Act: 10/18/72
o Establishment of the EPA: first proposed 7/9/70, established 12/2/70
o National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA): 1/1/70
o The Wilderness Act: 9/3/64
As this list demonstrates, the Senate and the environmental movement are no strangers to passing major legislation right before - or just after - an election.
I don't want to overpromise success. This is an uphill battle. But if you and I show up to every town hall, rally, spaghetti dinner, and other rituals of election year and fight for our kids... fight for our country... fight for our America... we can turn the tide. Without that kind of passion, we will all lose. That's an outcome we must try hard to avoid, on behalf of people, communities, large and small businesses - oh, and our kids, sleeping peacefully or playing happily around the country.
In the meantime, we must also protect what we already have, like a plethora of state laws and the federal Clean Air Act. I recommend reading David Doniger's blog on Switchboard today that really outlines how we can make progress with the tools we have right now.
In coming weeks and months, we must continue to push forward for a strong, clean energy and climate bill, just like we have done countless times in the past. I am done with blame. History is on our side. Are you?
Take action today for a cleaner, stronger, and more sustainable future. Join NRDC Action Fund on Facebook and Twitter and stay up-to-date on the latest environmental issues and actions you can take to help protect our planet.
Yesterday, President Obama met with Senators at the White House and pushed them to pass comprehensive, clean energy and climate legislation. Still, the skeptics are spinning a monotonous web of negativity regarding what is achievable on this front. And, not surprisingly, the "mainstream media" once again has been asleep at the wheel in setting the record straight. Fortunately, we know that when this President rolls up his sleeves, he gets stuff done and delivers on his promises. One thing’s for sure; President Obama is anything but an underachiever!
Along these lines, President Obama held a press conference following the G-20 summit in Toronto. In response to a reporter’s question regarding how he would achieve his deficit reduction goals, the president responded:
For some reason people keep being surprised when I do what I said I was going to do. So, I say I’m going to reform our [health care system], and people say well gosh that’s not smart politics maybe we should hold off. Or I say we’re going to move forward on [Don’t Ask Don’t Tell] and somehow people say well why are you doing that, I’m not sure that’s good politics. I’m doing it because I said I was going to do it, and I think it’s the right thing to do. And people should learn that lesson about me, because next year when I start presenting some very difficult choices to the country I hope some of these folks who are hollering about deficit and debt step up cause I’m calling their bluff.
To that list of accomplishments, we could also add:
Creating or saving 2.2-2.8 million jobs, well on the way to Obama’s February 2009 pledge that he would "create or save 3-and-a-half million jobs over the next two years."
Reforming Wall Street (likely to pass Congress any day now)
Overhauling the student loan market
Reaching a nuclear arms treaty with Russia
We could go on and on, but you get the point: anyone who continues, at this point, to be "surprised" when President Obama gets things done when he puts his mind to it is deep in denial. Or, as a previous president might have put it, they are wildly "misunderestimating" our 44th president.
Clearly, as we’ve seen over the past two years, underachieving is not a problem Barack Obama suffers from. Of course, even a superachiever like Barack Obama has an awful lot on his plate to deal with. And right now, one of the most important things on Obama’s plate is figuring out how to push comprehensive clean energy and climate legislation through the U.S. Senate. Along those lines, yesterday, Obama met with a group of Senators on this issue, reportedly holding firm in his call for putting a price on carbon emissions.
The question at this point is, will President Obama roll up his sleeves and deliver on another of his major campaign promise (as well as a major challenge facing our nation)? Given the long list of accomplishments mentioned above, it certainly wouldn’t be smart to bet against him. The fact is, Barack Obama usually succeeds in whatever he puts his mind to.
Given the nation’s increased focus on energy and climate issues – and the increased support by the American people for taking strong action as a result of the Gulf of Mexico oil disaster – now is clearly the time for boldness and for bluff calling by our nation’s leaders. Today, President Obama has the opportunity to demonstrate once more that, when he rolls up his sleeves, he accomplishes what he says he’s going to do. In sum, today is clearly the moment for President Obama to prove the doubters and naysayers wrong – to call their bluff - yet again!
As is often the case, the "mainstream" media nowadays is pushing a "conventional wisdom" line that has only one major problem – it’s largely or completely wrong. In this case, the "wisdom" is that voting for limits on carbon pollution is bad politics. The polling indicates it’s far more complicated than that.
For instance, the latest CBS/NY Times poll indicates that nearly 90% of Americans believe U.S. energy policy needs either "fundamental changes’ or "to be completely rebuilt," while 97% of Americans are "angry" or "bothered" by the Gulf of Mexico oil spill. Those percentages hardly appear to indicate a status quo, "conventional wisdom" electorate on this issue, or an automatic political downside to making fundamental changes in U.S. energy policy.
Perhaps that is why, when you actually look at the 17 Democrats up for reelection this year (Bayh, Bennet, Boxer, Burris, Dodd, Dorgan, Feingold, Gillibrand, Inouye, Leahy, Lincoln, Mikulski, Murray, Reid, Schumer, Specter, Wyden) and subtract out those retiring (Bayh, Burris, Dodd, Dorgan) or defeated in a primary (Specter), you find that the vast majority – all except for Blanche Lincoln - are in favor of climate and energy legislation. Let’s take a look.
Michael Bennet- What could be clearer than this recent quote, "The best way to limit carbon pollution is for Congress to pass a comprehensive climate and energy bill." Barbara Boxer- A climate champion by any measure Russ Feingold- Issued a statement declaring, "Climate change is real and we need to address it. By blocking action on climate change, the Murkowski resolution would have stalled our march toward energy independence through more efficient vehicles, alternative fuels and renewable energy, all of which can spur new American jobs." Kirsten Gillibrand - Listed as a definite "yes" on a comprehensive clean energy and climate bill by E&E News Daniel Inouye- Also listed as a definite yes by E&ENews Patrick Leahy- He recently stated, "Let us not be known as the Congress that continued to punt, pass and kick on some of the crucial issues like these, on which the American people are looking for solutions, not procrastination." Barbara Mikulski - Listed as a definite yes on a comprehensive, clean energy and climate bill by E&ENews Patty Murray- Also listed as a definite yes by E&ENews Harry Reid – Has called for "bring[ing] comprehensive clean energy legislation before the full Senate later this summer." Chuck Schumer- Also listed as a definite yes by E&ENews Ron Wyden- Also listed as a definite yes by E&ENews
And let’s not forget these two letters – one on March 19 to Harry Reid and the other on January 26 to President Obama - showing 33 Senators (not even counting John Kerry and Joe Lieberman, who didn’t sign either letter but obviously are champions on this issue, plus most likely others as) clearly calling for climate legislation.
So, why is it that we keep seeing the perception in the "mainstream media" that a vote for comprehensive clean energy and climate legislation is bad politics? Perhaps because of the unfortunate tendency of the "mainstream media" to keep recycling quotes from a few loud Senators -- like Byron Dorgan and Evan Bayh -- who just happen to be exiting the scene altogether for potentially "greener" (and not in the environmental sense!) pastures. For the "mainstream media," recycling their preferred narrative may make a good story (or the story they want to tell, for whatever reason). In politics, however, perception is nine tenths of reality, and in this case the reality is that there is far too much at stake for this country to rely on "conventional" wisdom, especially when the facts – those troublesome things - tell a very different story.
In this context, this past Friday, Greg Sargent of The Plum Line asked an important question regarding clean energy and climate legislation in the U.S. Senate: "Can A bold new crop of Senators save carbon limits?" Sargent’s intriguing thesis was that[,] "[i]f carbon limits have any prayer of surviving in the Senate's energy reform bill, it may turn on the efforts of one group: The energetic freshman and sophomore Senators that are pushing hard to keep carbon limits alive." Sargent pointed to an interview with one of those freshmen, Jeff Merkley of Oregon, in which he argued that "There's a lot of new energy in those two classes, and they recognize that this is the moment."
In short, what Merkley’s saying is that it’s time for Democrats to stop listening so much to the "old guard" of Senators who are retiring. Instead, Merkley makes the case for paying more attention to the Senate freshman (and sophomores), who by definition were elected relatively recently and, therefore – at least theoretically - might have their fingers closer to the pulse of the public than the old timers. In part, the question is whether there could be a "generational" difference going on here. Not "generational" in the chronological sense, in which "younger" Senators are more pro-environment than "older" Senators. But, perhaps, "generational" in the sense of "political age," as in "how long have they been in Washington, DC?"
Given the analysis above, we might want to add "members in cycle" to Merkley’s admonition about listening more to freshmen then to old timers. Because the fact is, the majority of Democrats actually facing the polls this November are in favor of taking action on energy independence, clean energy, and holding corporate polluters accountable. Perhaps this is because they are listening to what the public is clearly demanding, which is fundamental change in U.S. energy policy? And perhaps they are not listening to a "conventional media" narrative which is completely wrong? Regardless of the reason, it appears at the moment – and certainly on this issue - that Democrats would be better served by listening more to the folks facing public opinion, as well as those elected more recently, and less to the ones preparing to depart for "greener" pastures.
40 days from today - on May 18 - we will see two HUGE primaries for U.S. Senate. Even though these races aren't in Texas, they impact Democrats across the country and, well, the entire country as a whole.
In Pennsylvania, Democratic Congressman Joe Sestak will try to upset Republican-for-decades Arlen Specter.
In Arkansas, Democratic Lieutenant Governor Bill Halter will try to upset corporate lackey Blanche Lincoln.
These two races are tremendously important to defining who and what the Democratic Party is and what we will be fighting for.
If you can volunteer for these candidates (or encourage friends and family in Pennsylvania and Arkansas to do so), that would be amazing.
Of course, if you can help with a contribution to either or both via the Expand the Map! ActBlue page as soon as possible, it will make a big impact.
Polling shows that both Specter and Lincoln are at risk of - if not likely to - hand these Senate seats over to far-right-wing Republicans. (And, even if these two retain the seats, that's not much better on many key issues.)
Congressman Sestak and Lieutenant Governor Halter winning these primaries are critical to keeping these seats in truly Democratic hands. Your support can help make that happen! Please hop over to the Expand the Map! ActBlue page right away to make a contribution - an investment in the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party to pull out an old expression - and show your support.
Thanks SO much for any support you can provide. 40 Days.
A lot is being made about Martha Coakley's loss in "historically blue" Massachusetts.
First, lets get one fact out of the way. Republican State Senator, Scott Brown ran a solid campaign with few to no errors. On the other hand, Democrat Martha Coakley ran an awful campaign with some errors that are being described as "one of the costliest political blunders of all time."
Second, as Harold Cook and Phil Martin both point out, Texas is not Massachusetts. A single point of data is not a trend, and the shortsightedness of the press is a gross misrepresentation of the current political climate and facts.
Let's look at some startling facts.
As recently as 2002, Mitt Romney the Governor's mansion in Massachusetts even with questions surrounding his residency status.
Since 1990, Massachusetts has elected 4 Republicans and 1 Democrat. The Democrat is Deval Patrick and he took office in 2007. The only other Democrat to serve as Governor in Massachusetts in my short life time is Michael Dukakis. He took office in 1983.
Coakley was a flawed candidate. The Hill is already calling her mistakes, "the costliest political blunders of all time." After winning the nomination, Coakley stopped campaigning and went on vacation. She confused the Red Sox with Yankees, and arguably misspoke about Afghanistand and the Middle East.
Now let's talk about Texas (After all, that's what this all about).
Massachusetts represents an, on paper, 25+ point plus swing. Rick Perry, the likely nominee, has a waning base of 39%. Even in a redish state, Perry needs +11 to get even. In 2008, a presidential year with elevated turnout, Republicans were +12 in the presidential race, +8 in the railroad commissioner race, and the largest gap in the Texas Supreme Court race was +10 and smallest was +6.
All sizable gaps, but Perry is facing two well funded races in 2010 and starts with a massive voter gap and high negatives.
Rick Perry has been on the statewide ballot for 25 years and is only 10 points ahead of someone who's never run statewide.
Bill White has not run a dime of TV.
And some takeaways:
Bill White "very favorables" are stronger than any other candidate.
Only 16% of voters "strongly approve" of RP job performance.
Perry trails White by five among women.
As one friend astutely put it, Massachusetts may have been Mars for Texas.
Bill White isn't making Coakley style mistakes. He is running a smart, active, grassroots, field oriented campaign. As I understand it, he doesn't plan on going on vacation on labor day and ignore his campaign and he knows the difference between both the Astros and Rangers and Texans and Cowboys.
Last night isn't a trend either. Let's take a look at all the federal elections that have occurred to date. The New York 20th, Illinois 5th, California 32nd, California 10th and the New York 23rd. Democrats won everyone of those special elections. The New York 23rd being the most impressive since a Democrat hasn't held that seat since 1993 when Democrat Michael R. McNulty has his seat redistricted and in 2008, the Republican John McHugh won +17.7. I only spent time comparing apples to apples. Special election to special election. They are different than general elections and require a different campaign structure, timeline, and level of organizing.
If anything, Massachusetts shouldn't be a sign for Democrats in Texas. Instead, it should be a wake up call for Kay Bailey Hutchison. Her inept, pathetic, go nowhere campaign does strike certain similarities.
With six weeks to go before the primary, Hutchison looks a whole lot like Texas' answer to Martha Coakley. Coakley clearly believed she (as a Democrat) was entitled to the job and didn't have to show the people that she'd work her butt off to get it. Hutchison has made it clear that she believes she is entitled to be governor of Texas, simply because she is-drum roll and fanfare, please!-Kay Bailey Hutchison.
Katy Bacon, communication director for the Bill White campaign detailed how they are approaching this campaign and the Texas electorate.
The Texas Governor's race is going to be about issues that matter to Texans. People in our state are sick of career politicians who are more interested in keeping track of political points than getting results. Bill White isn't about the agenda of a political party and never has been -- he's about working hard to ensure that our workforce of the future is educated so that we attract new businesses and new jobs to our state.
At the end of the day, we have learned two things from the slew of special elections leading up to November. 1) Inept campaigns lose. 2) Entitled campaigns lose too.
The following is a link to HTML/JAVA Clock, which counts deaths from lack of Health Insurance. The count is based on 44,789 deaths per year from the American Journal of Public Health; the study Representative Alan Grayson cited on the House floor.
Detailed fundraising numbers from the Sharp and White Senate campaigns show a striking discrepancy in the source of both candidates' fundraising. In the fundraising quarter ending September 30, John Sharp loaned himself over $500,000 of the $615,000 he reported to the FEC. The following table breaks out the numbers:
Other Peoples' Money
Loans from Candidate
Contributions from Candidate
Total Raised
Expenditures
White:
$1,116,813
$0
$414,399
$1,549,941
$703,108
Sharp:
$107,204
$504,514
$0
$615,210
$170,190
In actual contributions from campaign supporters, White outraised Sharp by over 10 to 1.
Both candidates contributed to their own campaigns: Sharp loaned himself money, while White contributed the $414,399 as part of a donor-matching program during the last three days week of the quarter. White and his wife Andrea matched donations that included $200,000 in online giving through ActBlue and the campaign website. That $200,000 raised online by White in the last three days week of the quarter is more than Sharp raised from all of his donors throughout the three months of the quarter.
It's also interesting to compare these numbers to the candidates' expenses. White is running a full state-wide campaign with organizers and physical office space in most regions of the state. However, he more than raised enough to cover his significant expenses. On the other hand, the Sharp campaign spent more money in Q3 than it took in from outside contributions.
With the DSCC openly encouraging White, Sharp may begin to feel more pressure to switch to another race where Democrats desperately need a strong candidate. Without the FEC limits of $2400 per person, Sharp would likely find it easier to raise money closer to the levels he did as Comptroller. Of course, Sharp has given no public indication that he is considering switching races.
