Hillary Clinton's 103 Delegate Lead Over Obama

While CNN is reporting a surge in support for Obama in New Hampshire (Connecticut Bob has more on New Hampshire Primaries), it is clear that he has a lot of ground to make up. From the "I shit you not!" files:

Barack Obama’s stirring victory in Iowa was also a good night for our democracy. The turnout broke records and young people - who were mobilized and organized - participated in unprecedented numbers. And now that Iowans have spoken - the first citizens in the nation to do so - here’s the Democratic delegate count for the top three candidates (2,025 delegates are needed to secure the nomination):

Clinton - 169

Obama - 66

Edwards - 47

“Huh?” you say. “vanden Heuvel, you made a MAJOR typo.”

In fact, those numbers are correct: the third-place finishing Sen. Hillary Clinton now has over twice as many delegates as Sen. Obama, and more than three times as many delegates as the second-place candidate, Sen. John Edwards. Why? Because the Democratic Party uses an antiquated and anti-democratic nominating system that includes 842 “super-delegates” - un-pledged party leaders not chosen by the voters, free to support the candidate of their choice, and who comprise more than forty percent of the delegates needed to win the nomination. Many have already announced the candidate they will support.

Oui over at BooMan Tribune offers this up in comments to help explain:

Superdelegates for Clinton (Undecided's No. 1)

(NYT/CBS News) Nov. 8, 2007 - In an early indication of where Democratic Party leaders are leaning, a survey of the party's superdelegates -- elected officials and other leaders who vote at the party's convention but are not selected in primaries -- found they are favoring Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York.

Created by the Democratic Party in 1984, superdelegates include members of Congress, governors, former presidents, Democratic National Committee members and other party leaders. There are 850 of them, which comprises nearly one-fifth of the overall delegate count. They can back any candidate they want and change their mind as often as they want.

... more than a third of the party's 850 superdelegates said they were undecided.

New York Times/CBS News Poll

The superdelegates are in no way bound by their stated preferences and dynamics in the race are likely to change.

Democrats' Superdelegates Unswayed

In the same comment threads idredit offers some food for thought on this issue brought up by Katrina vanden Heuvel:

The Super-delegates Issue:

"In a clear attempt to protect the party establishment, this undemocratic infrastructure was created following George McGovern's landslide defeat in 1972. It was designed to prevent a nominee who was "out of sync with the rest of the party," Northeastern University political scientist William Mayer told MSNBC. Democratic National Committee member Elaine Kamarck called it a "sort of safety valve."

MSNBC article - "What role for Democratic Super-delegates? - had this

Evidence of momentum

Building the appearance of momentum and inevitability is why Clinton and her rivals will gradually be unveiling their endorsements by super-delegates.

Howard Dean's momentum appeared unstoppable in the first weeks of 2004. Super-delegate Sen. Tom Harkin of Iowa said emotionally a few days before his state's caucuses, "In my entire adult lifetime, I have never seen anyone broaden our party and bring people in and excite young people... like Governor Howard Dean." It was powerful testimony from a hard-nosed politician.

Dean had amassed the most super-delegates before the Iowa caucuses. But many had buyer's remorse and some abandoned him once he finished a weak third in Iowa.[.]

In the two weeks following the Iowa caucuses, 36 of 132 Dean's super-delegates peeled away from him; while John Kerry's tally jumped from 74 to 102."

So, Clinton beware!

I had never realized that the grassroots primary voter was relegated to only a 60% share of the vote in the Democratic primaries. It is so anti-Democratic in so many ways.

It is pretty clear that things can change, as far as the previous declarations of of intent by these "Super Delegates," but this is a system that needs to be tossed along with the conservative DLC types that would likely covet it as populism is on the rise.

[update] Welcome to Crooks and Liars, skippy the bush kangaroo, NYC Educator, American Street, NewstThief, House of the Rising Sons and Jabberwonk readers and please feel free to enjoy some fresh brews on me!

danvera notes in comments here that a movement of "Super Delegates" may already be happening:

"Clinton Machine Shaken by Setback"

The scope of Barack Obama's victory in Iowa has shaken the Clinton machine down to its bolts. Donors are panicking. The campaign has been making a round of calls to reassure notoriously fickle "superdelegates" — elected officials and party regulars who are awarded convention spots by virtue of their titles and positions — who might be reconsidering their decisions to back the candidate who formerly looked like a sure winner. And internally, a round of recriminations is being aimed at her chief strategist, Mark Penn, as the representative of everything about her pseudo-incumbent campaign that has been too cautious, too arrogant, too conventional and too clueless as to how much the political landscape has shifted since the last Clinton reign. One adviser summed up the biggest challenge that faces the campaign in two words: "Fresh thinking."

It should also be noted that with a third of the super delegates undecided when the NY Times took its poll (image ^^up there^^), there is a lot of wiggle room for movement on their support.

As well, Mike's Blog Roundup suggests reading one of my favorite Blogs' - The Strange Death of Liberal America - post titled "Can Barack Obama Pull Off a Woodrow Wilson?" as a companion piece to this one:

"In the aftermath of the Iowa Caucuses, Barack Obama’s stunning win has the pundits seeking parallels. The problem is they are all looking in the wrong places. They need to go back 100 years. In keeping with this blog’s reputation for original analysis, I offer a historical analogy that you will read here and nowhere else."

Sorry Liberal American... But you can read a snippet of it here too!

[update deux] The eggman runneth over at the Drudge Report with a screeching headline full of what must be right-wingnutty wishful thinking:

"TALK OF HILLARY EXIT ENGULFS CAMPAIGNS"

As I said... Screeching, BUT not a siren or flashing light in sight so I don't think that anyone could mistake that GOP wet-dream as anything more than non-news. (h/t Memeorandum) Even the right wing Captain's Quarters points out the obvious:

It didn't work with Fred Thompson, and it won't work with Hillary Clinton. Matt Drudge says that Hillary's considering withdrawing from the race if she loses big to Barack Obama in tomorrow's New Hampshire primaries -- a notion that makes even less sense for Hillary than Fred (...snip...) A flashing siren on Drudge won't be enough.

Maybe that is why Drudge didn't even bother with the siren... He has got to know that nobody will buy that story.

[update trois] Ken Layne at Wonkette seems to have captured the image of what was a fading siren by the time I read the story:

Have you ever seen a sadder Drudge Report Siren? Hillary can’t leave Matt, not after he’s been telling the world how she’s so smart and tough and the whole President Clinton Jr. thing is inevitable! Hang in there, Matt! Hillary might still be your Queen.

Too funny!


[update quatre] ABC gave a different breakdown of the decided Super Delegates:

Because super delegates are unpledged, they are under no obligation to state their preferences publicly before the convention. Counting super delegates is an inexact science, but this is the best estimate of the current state of play according to the super delegate responses we've received.

DELEGATES

Clinton 158

Obama 89

Edwards 26

Richardson 20

Dodd 15

Biden 8

Kucinich 1

Gravel 0

[update cinque] An explanation of how the Delegates are allocated, because it confused the heck out of Aristocrats, posted in 2003:

Delegate counts, super delegates

"The allocation of each state's delegates to each candidate is a bit murky, but in general it's apportioned by a complex series of formulas that kick in once a candidate crosses the 15% threshhold.

For example, this is how North Dakota allocates its delegates:

Here's how we compute the delegate count:

1. A candidate must receive 15% or more of the total popular vote to qualify for delegates. Discard those votes cast for candidates who do not qualify.
2. Allocate Congressional District delegates from the qualified vote in each district. Allocate Pledged PLEO and At-Large delegates using the statewide qualified vote.
3. In each jurisdiction:
1. Total qualified vote = total votes cast for the qualifying candidates in the jurisdiction.
2. Allocation = (delegates for the jurisdiction) x (candidate's popular vote) ÷ (total qualified vote).
3. Assign each candidate the WHOLE NUMBER of delegates.
4. If delegates remain, allocate each of the remaining delegates to those candidates with the LARGEST REMAINDERS.

If you can figure out what that formula means then you're a smarter person than me.

Super Delegates can vote for whomever they want, but they generally vote with the winner of the popular vote. It would be highly undemocratic and a breach of faith to subvert the will of the voters and push an alternate candidate itself. Now if we were to face a brokered convention, then all bets would obviously be off. But the chances of that happening, as exciting as it would be for political junkies like us, is practically nill."

When this was posted in 2003 Iowa had 45 delegates and 9 super delegates. Those numbers have likely changed since then.

[update six] AP had a different breakdown for before the Iowa Caucus:

Most superdelegates contacted by the AP before the Iowa caucuses were undecided. However, among those who have endorsed a candidate, Clinton leads with 160, compared to 59 for Obama and 32 for former Sen. John Edwards.

Even The Left Blogosphere Falls Into Media Traps

I very rarely have anything to disagree with over at TPM since they do such great work on many issues but in this case Josh Marshall critiques the Dem debate like a wolf with one leg caught in the right wing media trap:

John Edwards also had, I thought, a very strong debate, particularly in the latter half of the debate. He talks a lot about feeling this fight in his blood and being a fighter. And it's important when you say things like that that it really resonates in what you say, how you act, who you seem to be. And I think it did on every count. Unfortunately for Hillary, most of the eloquence and fire was directed at her tonight.

The exchange I noted earlier from around 9:30 PM was the emotional, dramatic crux of the evening. After that a lot of the energy seemed to be released from the discussion. Not in a bad way necessarily. I thought each of them had very good moments in the second half. But that was the crux of the debate, where the key points were enunciated, and each candidate defined.

In general, I think Obama's the winner tonight. I think Hillary made her case well. I think Edwards had the best debate. But the debate can only be understood in the context of the moment. Right now, Obama's on fire. The first post-Iowa polls show him picking up a big post-caucus bump. He needed to come off well. Not make any mistakes. And not let Hillary open up any strong line of attack against him.

Forgive me for noticing the fact that Edwards took the second spot in Iowa, and even you said he had the best debate showing, so I don't buy the media spin about the Obama/Hillary fight and neither should TPM. It seems to me that Obama had to worry more about not opening up any line of attacks from Edwards. But that line doesn't follow the media's pre-written script about pre-ordained candidates, which is nothing more than a trap that I will not fall into.

We expect more, and certainly better, from you than this at TPM.

Celebrating Blogroll Amnesty Day!

It is a little early but Mike the Mad Biologist brings back an idea that skippy the bush kangaroo and Jon Swift got a lot of people involved in last February after January's link assault by some "A list" Bloggers:

"Speaking of Jon Swift, the start of 2008 seems like a good time to have another Blogroll Amnesty Day. If you're not on my blogroll, and I'm on yours, leave me a link below and I'll add you (note: racists, creationists, and flat-out weirdos won't be accepted). Instructions below the fold.

Please put your blog name on one line, and the url on the second line, like so:

Mike the Mad Biologist
http://scienceblogs.com/mikethemadbiologist/

or give me a line of html code, like so:

Mike the Mad Biologist

Thanks!"

Same goes for this Blog. If I am on your Blogroll and you notice that you are not on mine, tell me! I will fix it. Heck... Add me to yours and I will add you to mine. Just drop a note in comments here.

For me, it doesn't matter whether you are covering local Connecticut stuff, national politics, and or pretty much anything else. And if you click around you should be able to get a link from Mike, John Swift and skippy as well as from here! Four Blogroll links just for being astute enough to add 4 links from your Blogroll... Does it get any better or easier than that?

Some ideas are worth repeating over and over again. It is all about building a better Blogtopia! (y!sctp) I was re-repeating the mantra to left leaning people to "Link Damnit!" in a piece on the "Blog Link Meta Backlash" around the time all of that stuff was going down:

(Here I am with another "Link Damnit!" moment...)

Skippy hops along in Jon Swift's "Liberal Linking Policy" footsteps:

skippy the bush kangaroo:
we got yer 'amnesty' right here

"and who are we to limit political discourse diversity? what's going on here? it's as if the major blogs are trying to emulate the democrats in washington who suddenly forget about their constituents.

(ok, it's not. our metaphors suck tonight. but we're pissed. so cut us some slack.)

ergo, we here at skippy are planning to retaliate by offering real blog amnesty. and here's how it goes:

many smaller blogs link to skippy for one or more of a few reasons: out of politeness, out of a hope that we might notice them and link back, or simply out of the imitation of what it takes to make a good blog. it's the second reason that interests us (we really should have put it as the last reason to be more clear with sentence structure (on the other hand, using less parenthetical phrases in a paragraph would go a long way towards grammatical clarity (too late now))).

to wit: any blog that has linked to skippy and has not received a reciprocal blogroll link will now be included on our roll! all you have to do is notify us in our comments section or email us, and we will happily include you! that will show those big shot elitists too good for the little guy blogs! ha!"

At a time when the bigger Blogs need to be doing more to help build the left community some are, and some aren't. I find it ironic that I posted just last week on Chris Bowers argument that we need to link more effectively:

If everyone on the left works a little harder on this we can turn the tides on on the Google Wars and win. We have already made a lot of inroads since this 2004 picture:

The graphs represent the aggregate linkage going on leading up to the 2004 election. Reds (them) are the Republican bloggers, and Blues (us) are the Democratic bloggers. The full expanation of the graphs particulars are on page 9 of the PDF paper. Basically, the first graph connects dots (blogs) when there is strong linkage between them (+25 during the period), the second one where there is less stronger linkage (+5), and they've a 3rd map that includes all linkage that I've not included.

Between blogs then (not taking into consideration that diaries on #8DailyKos and #17MyDD serve to allow massive coordiantion and spreading of message), there's just a lot more coordination through linking among Republican than there has been with Democratic bloggers, at least on the surface of particular URL's. The other interesting thing I noted was that the blog by George Bush's campaign didn't even make the top 40-- now that's pitiful.

We were less coordinated in '04. But in '06 we did little things a little better. I am sure the more recent graphs would look a lot better. But you know that we can still keep on improving on this.

Remember that every time you link to any site you are, over time, creating a kind of GOOGLEBOMB effect on that site when it comes to site rankings, search results, etc.. Tagging and choice of words that are used to link are important in these cumulitive effects as well.

Now this week... Brilliant at Breakfast has the scoop on how MyDD has become an apologist for those attempting to cut out the links that we need to build the Left:

Shorter Chris Bowers

"We innovate more than you, we hired people to help us, and because we did that there is no place for you lone bloggers anymore -- because WE decide who makes it and who doesn't."

Oh, you really have to read this self-congratulatory drivel to believe it. It's truly amazing to see one blogger fellating the entire Big Name Blogosphere in one post, while at the same time consigning the rest of us to the ranks of the MySpacers.

Kool Kidz Klub indeed.

It's funny how Bowers uses a quote by Jeffrey Feldman to illustrate his point, because as I've mentioned before, I had a very nice conversation about blogging just last week with Mr. Feldman, who seems to be in no way a blog snob. In fact, I was pleasantly surprised to see that there is at least one Big Name Blogger who isn't puffed up with his own self-importance.

But with Kos and Atrios making a big show about "culling the blogroll", and Chris Bowers playing "Mine's Bigger" with the rest of the blogosphere, is this really what it's come to? Is this the Revenge of the Nerds come to fruition? Is this the guys who DIDN'T get laid on prom night finally staking their claim to coolness?

If so, are we going to sit by and take it? Are we going to just toil away while guys like Atrios and Kos and Chris Bowers define the rules and brand the rest of us as useless?

What an amazing flip-flop-contortion there Bowers... This leaves me wondering just how committed he really is to the cause.

Jon Swift puts it all in perspective:

I adopted this policy in a spirit of both self-interest and altruism. In the blogosphere links are like capital. By offering links to others, others would be more inclined to offer links to me. But I am also very grateful to those who helped me out by throwing a link my way or adding me to their blogroll when I was just starting out. Now that I am a Large Mammal, according the Truth Laid Bear Ecosystem, I have tried to return the favor by helping out those further down the food chain.

Links are capital! It is the foundation of bringing views from fellow bloggers out of obscurity and into the top of search engine results. And just how much does it cost any blogger to spend some of this valuable capital?

ZIP. Zilch. Zero dollars.

Not even one penny to use the most effective marketing tool that Blogtopia has to offer.

All you have to do is put a few seconds into the act of cut'n'paste into your Blogroll or into a post... And you make a huge difference for everyone in our fight.

As ctblogger commented in an earlier MLN diary of mine on building a better community:

We should all work together to fight the good progressive fight and not be so critical in terms of other people's sites. I read CTBlue, Ed's Daily Rant, CT Local Politics, and the watch sites everyday and I learn something new from all of those guys which I incorporate into my site and that's the way it should be. Learn something from me and I learn something from you.

2006 is going to be a HUGE election year and Connecticut will be ground zero in terms of who controls Congress (2nd, 4th 5th district races). The faster we can all work to get this site up to full-speed, the more national attention it will receive.

He also called me out for not having links to his sites... Which I quickly fixed. lol

2006 is behind us but there are still a lot of common causes that we all share, and we can all help each other in achieving our goals. Linking is the first, easiest AND cheapest way to start.

For more background on all of this: Boston Joe has a Meta diary up x-posted at BooTrib and at MLW covering a bit more of this Meta discussion in a thoughtful way. Both have generated a lot of comments. I usually hate Meta... But this topic is the foundation of what Blogging is all about.

We can do better than we have been doing. And if we keep building on what we already have our numbers (and the fact that we deal in reality) will easily overcome the right wing echo chamber's lies and propaganda.

Start the new year off kicking Blogtopia (y!sctp) up a notch! BAM!

[update] Many Bloggers chose to participate in Blogroll Amnesty Day, but did it work?

Yes! But not perfectly:

Rotus correctly deduced that Technorati and the like don’t recognize blogrolls when they calculate how many times your blog has been linked to. They do count if the links are in a post so, like Rotus, I’m going to make a post of our blogroll so everyone can get a Technorati hit. It is alphabetical and leaves out the retailers.

As always, we have an open blogroll policy so if you want on, drop us a line in the comments. Blogroll after the jump:

A Blog Around the Clock

American Street

Argue with Everyone

Bitch Ph.D.

Center Face

Chuck for…

Clark’s Picks

Crinch Pin

Daily Kos

Drinking Liberally in New Milford

Eschaton

Firedoglake

Hullabaloo

I’ll Never Forget the Day I Read a Book

I’m Jus’ a Lil’ Dizzy

Ice Station Tango

Jon Swift

Kiko’s House

Last Left Turn Before Hooterville

Maryannaville

Memeorandum

Mike the Mad Biologist

Monkeyfister

Moue Magazine

My View of “IT”

Old Fashioned Patriot

On My Mind

One Good Thing

Ornery Bastard

Pandagon

Pharyngula

Pygalgia

Rightwingsnarkle

ROTUS

Sadly, No!

Shattered Soapbox

Skippy the Bush Kangaroo

Talking Points Memo

The Crone Speaks

The Culture Vultures

The Democratic Daily

The Ex-Lion Tamer

The Field Negro

The Great Endarkenment

The Impolitic

The Largest Minority

The Mahatma X Files

The Midpoint

The Osterly Times

The Political Cat

The Seminal

Undeniable Liberalism

World O’Crap

Zen Comix

I hope that helps a little in fixing the problem, and I still plan on using these Blogs for references in future posts...

A Little Tweety Hypocrisy on Obama and Edwards

Go back to the entire show and look at who comes on as the Obama representative right after this exchange...

Then he asks Elizabeth to differentiate between John and Barack Obama, and when she tries to play up John’s populist appeal, Tweety’s response is to denigrate trial lawyers as an undesirable interest group to be supporting Edwards’ campaign, even going so far as to blame trial lawyers for the lack of bartenders in Pennsylvania. Huh? Is he forgetting that Elizabeth Edwards was a trial lawyer herself? Watch how Elizabeth constantly tries to get Matthews to focus on John Edwards’ campaign and Tweety’s little mind flits elsewhere.

If you didn't notice, the next guest after this exchange was a trial lawyer supporting Obama. Yet... Not a word about that fact from Tweety.

Why not?

Why is it a horror story if a trial lawyer supports Edwards, but not even notable if the next guest introduced is a trial lawyer supporting Obama?

Note: I can't find the video of it OR the transcripts... But I am certain it is the case as I noticed it as soon as he introduced the Obama supporter right after the Elizabeth Edwards shtick... If you have the video of it somewhere, or the transcripts, please send it my way!

A Little More Hastert and Foley Muck

For the road, from Josh Marshall:

Ex-Speaker Denny Hastert (R-IL) initially failed to tell the FEC about the $147,000 he spent on lawyers in the Foley scandal. Hastert had to close down his campaign to avoid big time fines.

I wonder if Hastert got anything in return for blowing that big wad of cash on Foley legal love?

RedState Founder GBCW Diary Rips GOP Candidates

BWAHAHAHA! And from BooMan:

If you are a fan of Goodbye Cruel World (GBCW) diaries you can't do much better than reading RedState founder Thomas Crown's rambling masterpiece where he tells the GOP presidential contenders to 'go Cheney themselves' and also insults many of our friends.

Actually, BooMan... It gets even better when you read his diary from the day before where he rants on why their GOP candidates (and their party) is in pitiful shape:

"And the horses you all rode in on, one at a time, then rotate.

You all have no idea how long I've wanted to write this. For the reasons set forth in my next diary, I can, and am; but I've been saving this up for a while. Pardon the spleen.

Dear Senators Thompson and McCain; Governors Romney and Huckabee; and Mayor Giuliani: You all suck.

Read on to see why. Or don't; I figure only two of you are smart enough to care why a conservative, Mass-going Catholic would personally drive the buggy to take you all to Hell.

Before I go any further, to any outraged supporters of any of these candidates: Toss it. So many of you have spent so much time shilling for your preferred choices, you've lost track of first principles. I have no time for far too many of you, and those of you with the brainpower to actually merit notice have picked the wrong company in which to travel."

Tell us how you really feel about how the "Great and Failed Republican Experiment" got you to where you are now? No... We know you won't admit that part, but that is the horse you all rode in on, then rotate.

Will Clinton Be Third Wheel in Iowa?

Hillary Clinton's campaign may be bracing for this possibility:

As the presidential candidates engage in furious pre-caucus spin, one of Sen. Hillary Clinton's most prominent Iowa supporters said Wednesday that she's already accomplished what she needs to in Iowa and can declare success even if she finishes in third place.

Former Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack told ABC News that Clinton has shown that she can appeal to a wide swath of Democrats, which is what she came to Iowa to do.

Sure... We are certain she was planning on this all along.

With Dennis Kucinich recently giving a codified endorsement to Barak Obama and Ralph Nader giving an endorsement to John Edwards - and depending on whether or not you give those endorsements any credibility - there is a possibility of Obama and Edwards getting a little more traction from the left.

I view this more as the reality that while the media had pre-ordained Queen Con as the Democratic party front runner from the get go, the people that actually vote in this - the democratic party members - have never bought the media propaganda and think of Hillary Clinton as something between a moderate conservative and a full blown Joe Neocon Lieberman wingnut Republican. Her biggest problem? She did very little to dispel that perception of herself both before and during the primary campaign. In fact, she seemed to try and re-enforce that perception with some of the idiotic votes, positions and statements.

Even with all of the campaign money in the world...
You cannot buy credibility.

Silly Billy Willy Kristol

Where do you even begin with a statement like this?

The idea that The New York Times is giving voice to a guy who is a serious, respected conservative intellectual — and somehow that’s a bad thing,” Rosenthal added. “How intolerant is that?”

Serious? He is seriously wrong on every issue he tackles. Respected? Not by anyone that actually fact checks his statements and track record. Conservative intelectual? FAAAAAR RIGHT WINGNUT UBER-NEOCONSERVATIVE, lightweight propagandist, and intellectual featherweight. And that is being generous.

Given Kristol's intolerance of facts and his taking a job at a paper he has derided for years, does Kristol look sillier OR does the NY Times look even sillier for adding another Judy Miller to their staff?

Crooks and Liars:

This will do little to convince their readers that he didn’t just make a huge mistake by hiring a pundit who has zero credibility and is one of the biggest hacks in all of wingnuttia. Mr. Rosenthal, it is not intolerant of the American people to want truth and accuracy from the supposed paper of record. It’s not about having opposing viewpoints, it’s that Kristol has been wrong on just about everything he’s said for the past five years. Not a little wrong, but really, really wrong. But according to Rosenthal, he’s really serious and gee, people really respect him. Well, I guess that makes up for all of the propaganda…war-mongering partisanship…hackery that Kristol has been given a national platform for already.

Hackery? Nope! It is just more wingnut welfare for the chronically insane failures in the warmongering neoconservative GOP wet set.

Who Do You Endorse?

And why?

Blue Gal over at C&L gives a shortlist on Democratic endorsements:

• Blue Hampshire endorses Chris Dodd.
  
  
• The Nation endorses Dennis Kucinich.
  
  
• The SEIU Union is funding advertising for John Edwards.

There is absolutely nothing worth looking at over on the Republican side, as it is a foregone conclusion that they are picking a candidate to try and lose gracefully with. If they really wanted to win, and if they really wanted to bring the change that is demanded by the people, all of their candidates would be slamming George W. Bush for being the worst president ever in the history of the USA, and they would be running from his legacy, not trying to sweep it under the carpet by ignoring the last seven years as if bush didn't exist and they didn't support him. If they really wanted to win, Republicans would all sound like Ron Paul on the key issues of our time.

As it is, Republicans seem to be content to hand the reigns over to the Democratic party. And they seem more interested in trying to influence the Democratic party's choice of candidates through their media spin cycles.

All I know is that the happier the media is with a candidate, the more I know that candidate is a piece of junk. The media would be happy if they could turn the trick of getting the people to vote for another conservative Democratic candidate that would continue the Corporate successes, and people's failures, of the last few decades.

None of these candidates would give the media and their right wing corporate masters the full satisfaction they crave:

• Blue Hampshire endorses Chris Dodd.
  
  
• The Nation endorses Dennis Kucinich.
  
  
• The SEIU Union is funding advertising for John Edwards.

And so they will continue to be maligned by the media and the right wing lunatics on the fringe side of the internet. And make no mistake about this, the left Blogosphere is the truest representative of mainstream and populist ideals in America today.

We are are all about protecting your rights under the Constitution, and the GOP and conservatives in general are all against you and your rights. The GOP has led this country into the abyss of Corporatism:

In the recently released annual survey of worldwide privacy rights by Privacy International and EPIC, the United States has been downgraded from “Extensive Surveillance Society” to “Endemic Surveillance Society.” As Glenn Greenwald notes, this is “the worst possible category there is for privacy protections, the category also occupied by countries such as China, Russia, Singapore and Malaysia.” In general, “the 2007 rankings indicate an overall worsening of privacy protection across the world, reflecting an increase in surveillance and a declining performance of privacy safeguards.”

And the media, what used to be the Fourth Estate in the balance of power, has silently sat by and watched this happen.

The USA is now a Corporatist country with no more freedoms than some of the worst Communist offenders.

This is another of the very real end results of the "Great Republican Experiment" and you can thank the GOP and their partners in crime, the media and their punditocracy echo chamber of non news right wing ignorance, for the current downfall of the USA.

This is an unusually large excerpt from C&L's Barbara O'Brien from about a year ago:

A (Pretty) Short History of Wingnutism:
"By now you probably see where we’re going. “American Way” conservatism was the dominant political philosophy in the 1920s, and the nation was governed by its principles through the Harding and Coolidge administrations, from 1921 to 1929. Some historians call this decade “the Republican Era.” The vigorous progressivism of 1900-1916 was vanquished, and the labor union movement lost ground. In fact, the longer one looks at America in the 1920s, the more familiar it gets — corporate profits rising faster than worker earnings; a crackdown on immigration; culture wars led by an aggressive Christian fundamentalist movement; and tax cuts galore. If they’d had iPods back then, you’d hardly know the difference.

Of course, it would come to pass that the Republican who won the 1928 presidential election by a landslide, Herbert Hoover, was probably sorry he won. The stock market crashed in October 1929, which marked the beginning of the Great Depression. The Depression was caused by a number of interacting factors, and since it was a worldwide phenomenon you can’t blame the Republicans for all of it. But in the United States many of those factors were created, directly or indirectly, by “American Way” conservative policies. Among these factors were a wildly overheated stock market (security regulation was socialism, after all) and the maldistribution of wealth that resulted from laissez-faire business policies. Since President Herbert Hoover was a tried-and-true “American Way” conservative, he mostly was at a loss to solve the nation’s economic problems, even though he had almost all of his four-year term to do so. In 1932 the nation turned to a liberal Democrat, Franklin Roosevelt, to make things right.

Righties are quick to point out that the New Deal had a limited impact on the Depression, and that the nation’s economy didn’t really pull out of the slump until the industrialization of World War II — over which FDR also presided. (This is just one of many examples of righties taunting lefties for not cleaning up rightie messes they couldn’t clean up themselves; Iraq is another.) But New Deal programs had a longer-term success in fostering economic stability. Federal deposit insurance, unemployment insurance, Social Security, increased government oversight of securities, and other New Deal innovations made Americans’ economic lives more secure and created a buffer against many of the factors that cause economic depressions.

And considering that rightie counter-arguments to the New Deal usually advocate returning to the same governing philosophy that allowed the Depression to happen, you’ll forgive me if I don’t take them seriously.

Anyway, after the FDR landslide in 1932 it was clear the right wing had fallen from grace. Righties spent the rest of the 1930s seething with resentment and planning a comeback. And just when they had a shot at re-taking the White House — bam, World War II happened. And this made the American Right look doubly stupid, because for the most part righties in the 1930s were isolationists who had not only pooh-poohed the threat of the Third Reich but had actually admired Mussolini.

After World War II righties rebounded with a fury. They did this in large part by taking the issue of national security away from the Democrats. It’s important to understand that the Right managed this not because of anything they actually accomplished, but through a “compilation of hysterical charges and bald-faced lies,” to quote Kevin Baker in this Harper’s article, “Stabbed in the Back,” which I vigorously urge you to read.

Much of the Red Scare and McCarthyist hysteria of the late 1940s and 1950s were as much about slapping down liberals and Democrats as it was about national security. See the Kevin Baker article for details. See also Richard Hofstadter’s Anti-Intellectualism in American Life (Vintage/Random House, 1962), in particular pp. 41-42 (emphasis added):

The inquisitors were trying to give satisfaction against liberals, New Dealers, reformers, internationalists, intellectuals, and finally even against a Republican administration that failed to reserve liberal policies. What was involved, above all, was a set of political hostilities in which the New Deal was linked to the welfare state, the welfare state to socialism, and socialism to Communism. In this crusade Communism was not the target but the weapon, and it is for this reason that so many of the most ardent hunters of impotent domestic Communists were altogether indifferent to efforts to meet the power of International Communism where it really mattered — in the area of world politics."

Go read it. See if you can easily pick out the parallels to many of the problems of today, and maybe begin to realize that not only has "The Great Republican Experiment" failed miserably, but that now is not the first time it has failed miserably.

Which candidates truly represent a change in course from the decades of Conservative failure?

• Blue Hampshire endorses Chris Dodd.
  
  
• The Nation endorses Dennis Kucinich.
  
  
• The SEIU Union is funding advertising for John Edwards.

None of them are perfect candidates, but none of them exhibit the grossest of failures that the media presents as the top tier candidates on either side of "the conservative candidates list."

Each of them have voiced support for AND/OR led in the recent battles for the little guys.

And the media and their right wing corporate masters hate them, malign them, marginalize them, trivialize them and belittle them for that.

And there is your clue as to why, IMHO, they are the best candidates to lead this country out of the ashes of The Failed Republican Experiment.

Norad Santa Tracker

The Norad Santa Tracker

The jolly gent, Santa Clause, has already hit Australia, New Guinea, Indonesia and parts of China. You can follow him all day long and late into the night at the Norad tracking site, which is updated every five minutes! Just be sure the kids are in bed before he hits your town.

To speak to a NORAD Santa Tracker in person:

Call toll free: 1 (877) Hi NORAD or 1 (877) 446-6723

Local, overseas: 1 (719) 556-5211 (cost incurred overseas)

Hearing Impaired: Contact your current relay service

If you have Google Earth you can follow him there in 3D:

Google Earth

• See Santa and his reindeer in 3D
• See more of Santa's stops around the world

New to Google Earth?
Download Google Earth

Download Santa Tracker

Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays to everyone!

From Connecticut Man1
Drinking Liberally in new Milford

There Is A Storm Brewing In NOLA

Some of you may not have noticed, as you do your last minute Christmas shopping, but there is a class war going on in this country... And the powers that be don't give a fuck if they have to use violence to stifle the voices of those that are willing to stand up against their brutal economic rape of the downtrodden in New Orleans.

Pepper Sprayed, Tasered and Determined in New Orleans

There was a tornado warning on Thursday, December 20th, with a cool front marching down south. The tornado that touched down though, was the incredible spirit, will and determination of those fighting for public, and affordable housing in this city, and taking on the NOPD and New Orleans City Council in the process.

We were prepared, Thursday, to challenge what we already knew would go down: the vote in the affirmative by the New Orleans City Council to demolish over 4000 units of critical, public and affordable housing in New Orleans. Our intent was to keep the meeting from happening, to prevent the vote, by peaceful, but loud, raucous protest. There was no intent to commit violence. Many of us were quite willing to be arrested. One of the principles decided on by public housing residents in this struggle is that it will be a non-violent struggle.



There were not now, nor have there ever been, plans to commit violence by any of our people. However, when people are physically attacked by police, sometimes you fight back. You can call it instinct, survival, or foolhardy, call it what you will, but human nature being what it is, sometimes people fight back. The first punch was thrown by the NOPD however, which you can observe by watching the above video.

I was one of those locked out that day. I brought my camera, fully intending to document even though locked out. We were behind and to the side of council chambers, locked out by virtue of a pair of handcuffs on the gate that encloses a covered driveway behind the chambers.

Police lined that covered driveway, and we knew there were significant numbers in the chambers. We received phone reports that our colleagues had prevented the meeting from beginning, by chanting and shouting and demanding that those locked out be allowed in.

Suddenly, from the outside, we saw at least 10 police officers rush into the building. We knew it was going down inside. We all began to scream and some of us shook the gate violently. We wanted in to help defend our sisters and brothers.

Duranta has a lot more on this. While Common Dreams has this up from Naomi Klein:

The Shock Doctrine in Action in New Orleans
by Naomi Klein

Readers of The Shock Doctrine know that one of the most shameless examples of disaster capitalism has been the attempt to exploit the disastrous flooding of New Orleans to close down that city’s public housing projects, some of the only affordable units in the city. Most of the buildings sustained minimal flood damage, but they happen to occupy valuable land that make for perfect condo developments and hotels.

The final showdown over New Orleans public housing is playing out in dramatic fashion right now. The conflict is a classic example of the “triple shock” formula at the core of the doctrine.

• First came the shock of the original disaster: the flood and the traumatic evacuation.

• Next came the “economic shock therapy”: using the window of opportunity opened up by the first shock to push through a rapid-fire attack on the city’s public services and spaces, most notably it’s homes, schools and hospitals.

• Now we see that as residents of New Orleans try to resist these attacks, they are being met with a third shock: the shock of the police baton and the Taser gun, used on the bodies of protestors outside New Orleans City Hall yesterday.

Democracy Now! has been covering this fight all week, with amazing reports from filmmakers Jacquie Soohen and Rick Rowley (Rick was arrested in the crackdown). Watch residents react to the bulldozing of their homes here.

And footage from yesterday’s police crackdown and Tasering of protestors inside and outside city hall here.

That last segment contains a terrific interview with Kali Akuno, executive director of the People’s Hurricane Relief Fund. Akuno puts the demolitions in the big picture, telling Amy Goodman:

This is just one particular piece of this whole program. Public hospitals are also being shut down and set to be demolished and destroyed in New Orleans. And they’ve systematically dismantled the public education system and beginning demolition on many of the schools in New Orleans–that’s on the agenda right now–and trying to totally turn that system over to a charter and a voucher system, to privatize and just really go forward with a major experiment, which was initially laid out by the Heritage Foundation and other neoconservative think tanks shortly after the storm. So this is just really the fulfillment of this program.

Akuno is referring to the Heritage Foundation’s infamous post-Katrina meeting with the Republican Study Group in which participants laid out their plans to turn New Orleans into a Petri dish for every policy they can’t ram through without a disaster. Read the minutes on my website.

Read the rest of Naomi Klein's piece here.

Power To The People

Give Peace A Chance!

Not the greatest musical talent... But he sure gets the message right!

The Mike Gravel Rap:
Power to the People - Give Peace a Chance

Think. Think. Think!

Yeah
Everybody talkin about politicians. Politicians. Politicians. Politicians. Politicians.
Nepotism. Patriotism.
Jingoism. Jingoism!
Phony patriotism is Jingoism!

Why won't you let me say what I want to say
Power to the people
Give peace a chance

Everybody talkin about Fascism. Fascism.
Militarism. Fanaticism. Terrorism. Terrorism!
Despotism. Despotism.
Fear. Fear. Fear!
Islamofascism. American Imperialism. American Imperialism. Harms way. Harms way.

Why won't you let me say what I want to say
Power to the people
Give peace a chance

Everybody talkin about pollution. Solution.
Revolution. Evolution. Evolution. Revolution.
Freedom of speech.
Freedom to be who you are.
The Constitution.

Why won't you let me say what I want to say
Power to the people
Give peace a chance

Power to the people
Give peace a chance

Everybody talkin about corporate censorship. Corporate censorship. Party censorship. Parties in censorship. Why? Why?
Are they afraid of the truth?
Ripped off. Ripped off.

Why won't you let me say what I want to say
Power to the people
Give peace a chance

Power to the people!
Power to the people
Give peace a chance

Why won't you let me say what I want to say
Power to the people
Give peace a chance

Power to the people!
Power to the people
Give peace a chance

Rove Gets Wingnut Welfare

Unless Rove plans on telling the truth about the lies and treason he helped orchestrate for the criminal bush administration and the GOP, Rove's book deal will be viewed as nothing more than far-right-wingnut spin:

After a three-week bidding period, Karl Rove has signed a deal with conservative Mary Matalin’s publishing imprint, Threshold Editions, to publish his memoirs. The bidding reached at least $1.5 million, but Threshhold would not disclose Rove’s final payment. When bidding began on Dec. 6, industry experts predicted Rove would get offered $3 million, though a publisher at Alfred K. Knopf said Rove “doesn’t have the personality” to land a major deal for his memoirs.

Given the fact that Rove has done nothing but spin since Newsweek offered him a spot to manufacture more bush lies, Rove's book deal is obviously nothing more than wingnut welfare.

Joe "Uncle Ernie" Lieberman

Or so Branny Boy thinks...

Is Joe Lieberman An Alcoholic Pedophile?

That's what the eccentric uncle in my family turned out to be. Of course, the internal dynamics of the "family" known as the Democratic Party are no doubt subtly different from those of my own, so perhaps not.

Still, Joe's recent remarks . . .

As he told reporters: "There's no question that at times I think some of the Democrats look at me sort of like the ... eccentric uncle, perhaps even the odd uncle at the family gatherings: 'We like him, but every now and then he says things that make us wonder.'"

. . . have got me thinking.

Fiddle about! Fiddle about!

I'm your wicked Uncle Ernie
I'm glad you won't see or hear me
As I fiddle about!
Fiddle about!
Fiddle about!

Freedom is on the march

Freedom of Information, that is:

Congress Eases Access to Gov't Records

Congress on Tuesday struck back at the Bush administration's trend toward secrecy since the 2001 terrorist attacks, passing legislation to toughen the Freedom of Information Act and increasing penalties on agencies that don't comply.

The White House would not say whether President Bush will sign the legislation, which unanimously passed the House by voice vote Tuesday a few days after it sailed through the Senate. Without Bush's signature, the bill would become law during the congressional recess that begins next week.

It would be the first makeover of the FOIA in a decade, among other things bringing nonproprietary information held by government contractors under the law. The legislation also is aimed at reversing an order by former Attorney General John Ashcroft in the wake of the attacks, in which he instructed agencies to lean against releasing information when there was uncertainty about how doing so would affect national security.

Hopefully this will make it harder for the dirtbags in the White House to continue to obstruct the many investigations into Bush administration and GOP crimes and scandals. CREW ought to be exceptionally happy about this news. BUT...

Expect another pResidential signing statement with this one, if he bothers to sign it at all? Likely, he will sign it. Just so he can try to falsely claim his right to ignore it.

"Note: this cartoon has been redacted
for no good reason whatsoever."

Think Progress Complains About Progress

Apparently a study on C-Span coverage of think tanks says Think Progress' mother ship, CAP, is center-left:

A new study by the Center for Economic and Policy Research “finds that right-wing think tanks got 51 percent of C-SPAN’s total coverage in 2006, while left-of-center think tanks only got 18 percent of their coverage (a mere 5 percent of which were ‘progressive’ think tanks). The other 31 percent of coverage went to centrist groups.” As TAPPED’s Kate Sheppard points out, this is at odds with C-SPAN’s stated aspiration of “a balanced presentation of points of view.”

Oddly, the study incorrectly lists the Center for American Progress as “center-left” rather than “progressive".

Yes, the imbalance tilted towards wacko right wingnuts' views on C-Span sucks. No big shocker there...

And no offense to the fine work Think Progress does, but IMHO you are center-left. And I mean that in a good way. The Overton Window has been so far to the right for so long and the right wing would love to continue to label you as pinko-lefty-liberal-socialist-commies.

While I find it interesting that many left and right leaning centrists choose to identify with the progressive label more these days, and most liberals just stick to the term liberal. Neither is a bad moniker, and both tend to deal with the reality of today’s politics as opposed to the frames of the right wing echoed in the media.

There are many of us working our asses off to drag the Overton Window back to a place where places like Think Progress will be counted as “center-left." Please don’t undo all of that hard work and smile and take that label. We’ll know the country is back on track to recover from the failed “Great Republican Experiment” when they call you center-right or moderate conservatives… Until then, STFU and take the center-left label for the cause, Damnit! :) lol

Dodd on FISA Victory

We won this battle but the GOP war against The Constitution and The Bill of Rights is still on. Meanwhile, Dodd sends a message to the hundreds of thousands of people that supported his efforts:



There is only one other Presidential candidate that has taken these Constitutional battles as seriously as Dodd by actually walking the walk. That is Dennis Kucinich, with Kucinich leading the charge on the Impeachment front and a myriad of other liberal/progressive issues. Other candidates merely pay lip service to these issues, or fall in line after the real leaders break ground on these issues.

Matt over at Dodd's Blog points out the obvious:

One of my recently discovered favorite blogs is Lead or Get Out of the Way. It's authors write under pseudonyms pulled from Revolutionary era patriots - their goal is to help promote more and better Democrats. One of the coolest features of their site is that they use two tag clouds to sort out who is leading the most and who most needs to get out of the way.

Take one guess who they see as leading the most?

Chris Dodd.

Remember that we must step up the pressure on Congress critters if we are ever going to effect real change. Send a message of thanks to Dodd here and/or fiscally REWARD outstanding behavior here...

As a side note: Here is some coverage of the other liberal New England Senator, Ted Kennedy, that was caught doing something good on this issue as well. And here is another Senator's personal take on the battle, as Russ Feingold Blogs over at TPM Cafe.

Spy VS Spy

OR spy agency vs spy agency... Via Talking Points Memo:

The Washington Post gets a retired FBI agent on the record who contradicts much of what former CIA agent John Kiriakou had to say last week about the capture and torture of Abu Zubaydah. Who to believe?

Via TPM Muckraker:

Abu Zubaydah was:

A) A high-ranking Al Qaeda operative who largely confounded U.S. interrogators with his literary and tactical genius until they submitted him to waterboarding and other forms of torture. After that, he provided key information that likely preempted future attacks.

B) A low-ranking and mentally ill Al Qaeda operative who provided valuable information under gentle questioning, but whose confessions made under torture were useless. Much of the threat information he provided was "crap."

A is the CIA's version (and the President's). B is the FBI's. And in today's Washington Post, Dan Eggen and Walter Pincus walk through the competing profiles. Zubaydah, remember, was one of the two detainees whose interrogations appeared on the destroyed CIA tapes.

It's clear off the bat that the version of events provided by John Kiriakou, the former CIA agent who launched something like a PR blitz last week, is not quite right. In his telling, Zubaydah held out until waterboarded; after only 35 seconds of that, he gave in and "from that day on, he answered every question."

By contrast, both CIA and FBI agents tell the Post that he provided valuable information before he was waterboarded. And there wasn't just one session: "Instead, [other former and current officials] said, harsh tactics used on him at a secret detention facility in Thailand went on for weeks or, depending on the account, even months."

And then you get to the real discrepancies.

Meanwhile, the destruction of the CIA torture tapes that sparked this inter-agency battle likely violated a court order concerning evidence of torture:

A federal judge has ordered a hearing on whether the Bush administration violated a court order by destroying CIA interrogation videos of suspected terrorists.

U.S. District Judge Henry H. Kennedy rejected calls from the Justice Department to stay out of the matter. He ordered lawyers to appear before him Friday morning.

In June 2005, Kennedy ordered the administration to safeguard “all evidence and information regarding the torture, mistreatment, and abuse of detainees now at the United States Naval Base at Guantanamo Bay.”

Take Gavel From Childish Joe Neocon Lieberman

Via TPM:

Marc Ambinder and Mike Allen are both reporting this afternoon that Joe Lieberman will appear in New Hampshire to endorse John McCain's presidential campaign.

A source familiar with the endorsement said that the two will appear of NBC's Today Show tomorrow morning and at a town hall meeting in New Hampshire.

The endorsement could help McCain with independents in the state.... The move will heighten speculation that McCain might ask Lieberman to join his ticket.

A few thoughts. First, this news hardly comes as a surprise. As far back as January, Lieberman said he would consider backing the Republican nominee in '08. Obviously, given that McCain and Lieberman have been joined at the hip in support of Bush's Iraq policy for five years, I would have been more surprised if he didn't endorse McCain.

snip

This is the natural evolution of an embarrassing senator who lost his way quite a while ago. It's unlikely, in a 51-49 Senate, that the Democratic leadership will punish Lieberman for this (by, say, reevaluating the decision to give him a committee chairman's gavel he never uses), but it's hardly an unreasonable move given the circumstances.

Previously brewed in New Milford:

Help Wanted: Prestigious Senate Career Opportunity

A prestigious opportunity for career advancement in the Senate:

The Democratic party is in search of a new Chairman (or chairwoman/chairperson) for the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. Moderate Senators need only apply.(1)

The Chairman's responsibilities and Jurisdictions will include real oversight concerning failures of the Bush administration in providing security to our nation during times of war, illegal invasions, ongoing occupations, and natural disasters, as well as overseeing the bloated budget and operations of the largest branch of government ever to be created in the US governments' history through legislation authored under the Republican controlled Senate and House, and signed by the Republican pResident of the time.

Your main and immediate responsibilities will include holding the needed hearings, directing sub-commitees and legislation needed to avoid repeating the previous disasters, corrupt practices, and failures that will be found with the proper direction and oversight of a NON-PARTISAN and ETHICAL Senate leader.

Send all applications to Senator Harry Reid(2)

(1)Minorities such as moderate Republicans having no ties to far-right-wing radical organizations like the Neoconservative movement, the American Enterprise Institute, The Heritage Foundation, Energy Corporations, or the Bush administrations most recent policy proposals that are doomed to failure, are encouraged to apply to Senator Harry Reid for any consideration concerning this soon to be available position.

(2)Note to applicants: Please mark the subject of the Email as "Homeland Security" and refer to this x-posted Blog diary in the opening paragragh of the application. You will be contacted shortly before I post an "I told you so!" diary covering the flawed positions, election statement lies, and propaganda of the far-right-wing radical Neoconservative Joe Lieberman.

ReReBlogged Since this position
has yet to be filled by a qualified,
ethical or sane candidate.

Conyers asks YOU to support Dodd on FISA

Support Dodd's Filibuster:

Dear Friend:

The Senate will soon consider legislation addressing the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). I emailed you about this issue recently responding to inaccuracies in the press about Democratic efforts to improve protection of civil liberties. I am writing you today to update you on the current state of the bill and to ask for your help.

One critical question being considered in the Senate's FISA bill is whether to offer telecom companies retroactive immunity for any actions they undertook in the wireless surveillance program. The Bush Administration has claimed that this is necessary for national security reasons, but I am skeptical.

If the Administration was serious about arguing for this immunity, I suspect they would take steps to demonstrate to Congress the extent of this surveillance program and what role the phone companies played. Yet they have refused to share even this information with the House. Clearly, it is a bit much to ask for immunity from prosecution without explaining why it is necessary.

Because of these reservations, the House-passed FISA bill did not include the immunity the president sought. In the Senate, however, it is becoming clear that a tough battle will now ensue over this provision. Senator Chris Dodd of Connecticut has been a vocal opponent of telecom immunity and has promised to filibuster any FISA legislation that includes this provision.

Senator Dodd needs your help right now. Please visit his site and lend your support to the filibuster now. Your help can make a difference at this important juncture.

Thank you again for your continued support for a better democracy.

Your Friend,
John Conyers, Jr.

Media Refuses to Print Congress Members Op-Ed

Hijacked in its entirety from Stephen D's diaries at the Booman Tribune:

Three members of Congress, all Democrats, all members of the House Judiciary Committee, wrote an op-ed and submitted it to various major national newspapers, including The New York Times and The Washington Post. Everyone turned them down, despite the fact that the issue which their op-ed addresses is one currently before the Judiciary Committee and is of great interest to millions of Americans. Why? Perhaps it had something to do with the subject matter: Impeachment Hearings.

The authors of the op-ed are Robert Wexler (D-FL), Luis Gutierrez (D-IL), and Tammy Baldwin (D-WI). Rather than give up on seeing their argument for proceeding with impeachment hearings meet the same fate as a tree falling in a forest when no one is there to witness its demise, they have decided to publish the op-ed online and seek netroots support in the form of a petition to Congress. Go to this link hosted by Rep. Wexler's website to sign their petition.

Now, in it's entirety, here is the op-ed The New York Times and The Washington Post, among others, didn't think worthy of publishing, thus depriving their readers of the opportunity to hear from the major Congressional proponents for impeachment hearings against Vice President Cheney:

A CASE FOR HEARINGS

By Representatives and Members of the Judiciary Committee:

Robert Wexler (D-FL), Luis Gutierrez (D-IL), and Tammy Baldwin (D-WI)

On November 7, the House of Representatives voted to send a resolution of impeachment of Vice President Cheney to the Judiciary Committee. As Members of the House Judiciary Committee, we strongly believe these important hearings should begin.

The issues at hand are too serious to ignore, including credible allegations of abuse of power that if proven may well constitute high crimes and misdemeanors under our constitution. The charges against Vice President Cheney relate to his deceptive actions leading up to the Iraq war, the revelation of the identity of a covert agent for political retaliation, and the illegal wiretapping of American citizens.

Now that former White House press secretary Scott McClellan has indicated that the Vice President and his staff purposefully gave him false information about the outing of Valerie Plame Wilson as a covert agent to report to the American people, it is even more important for Congress to investigate what may have been an intentional obstruction of justice. Congress should call Mr. McClellan to testify about what he described as being asked to “unknowingly [pass] along false information.” In addition, recent revelations have shown that the Administration including Vice President Cheney may have again manipulated and exaggerated evidence about weapons of mass destruction -- this time about Iran’s nuclear capabilities.

Some of us were in Congress during the impeachment hearings of President Clinton. We spent a year and a half listening to testimony about President Clinton’s personal relations. This must not be the model for impeachment inquires. A Democratic Congress can show that it takes its constitutional authority seriously and hold a sober investigation, which will stand in stark contrast to the kangaroo court convened by Republicans for President Clinton. In fact, the worst legacy of the Clinton impeachment – where the GOP pursued trumped up and insignificant allegations - would be that it discourages future Congresses from examining credible and significant allegations of a constitutional nature when they arise.

The charges against Vice President Cheney are not personal. They go to the core of the actions of this Administration, and deserve consideration in a way the Clinton scandal never did. The American people understand this, and a majority support hearings according to a November 13 poll by the American Research Group. In fact, 70% of voters say that Vice President Cheney has abused his powers and 43% say that he should be removed from office right now. The American people understand the magnitude of what has been done and what is at stake if we fail to act. It is time for Congress to catch up.

Some people argue that the Judiciary Committee can not proceed with impeachment hearings because it would distract Congress from passing important legislative initiatives. We disagree. First, hearings need not tie up Congress for a year and shut down the nation. Second, hearings will not prevent Congress from completing its other business. These hearings involve the possible impeachment of the Vice President – not our commander in chief – and the resulting impact on the nation’s business and attention would be significantly less than the Clinton Presidential impeachment hearings. Also, despite the fact that President Bush has thwarted moderate Democratic policies that are supported by a vast majority of Americans -- including children’s health care, stem cell research, and bringing our troops home from Iraq -- the Democratic Congress has already managed to deliver a minimum wage hike, an energy bill to address the climate crisis and bring us closer to energy independence, assistance for college tuition, and other legislative successes. We can continue to deliver on more of our agenda in the coming year while simultaneously fulfilling our constitutional duty by investigating and publicly revealing whether or not Vice President Cheney has committed high crimes and misdemeanors.

Holding hearings would put the evidence on the table, and the evidence – not politics – should determine the outcome. Even if the hearings do not lead to removal from office, putting these grievous abuses on the record is important for the sake of history. For an Administration that has consistently skirted the constitution and asserted that it is above the law, it is imperative for Congress to make clear that we do not accept this dangerous precedent. Our Founding Fathers provided Congress the power of impeachment for just this reason, and we must now at least consider using it.

Here is the video Rep. Wexler posted at his website and on YouTube regarding impeachment:

[update] As of 10:43 AM today (Sunday) Wexler has amassed more than the 50,000 signatures he was looking for:

55024
signed up and counting...

Go on over and add your name, if you haven't already?

What will 32 Million buy you in Iraq?

Absolutely nothing:

The U.S. military paid a Florida company nearly $32 million to build barracks and offices for Iraqi army units even though nothing was ever built, Pentagon investigators reported.

The project had to be abandoned because the Iraqi Defense Ministry couldn't obtain rights to the land where the headquarters were to be built, according to a report released this month by the Defense Department's Office of Inspector General. Contracting records show the buildings would have housed one brigade and three battalions of the Iraqi military in Ramadi, a hotbed of the Sunni Muslim insurgency and capital of Anbar province.

Still, the Air Force agency overseeing the project paid contractor Ellis Environmental Group $31.9 million of the $34.2 million obligated for the project, the report said.

How many kids could have been added to SCHIP with that kind of money?

And does John Ellis Bush (JEB) have any ties to the contractor in question?

Anyway... That company has done a lot of business with the military over the years:

Companies with federal contracts located in this zip code (NEWBERRY, FL):

* ELLIS ENVIRONMENTAL GROUP, LC (414 SW 140TH TERRACE; small business): $122,166,659 in 581 contracts from 1999 to 2006

Contracts for Maintenance, Repair or Alteration of Real Property -- Family Housing Facilities, Maintenance, Repair or Alteration of Real Property -- Other Administrative Facilities and Service Buildings, Maintenance, Repair or Alteration of Real Property -- Maintenance Buildings, Maintenance, Repair or Alteration of Real Property -- Office Buildings, and more by Army, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers - civil program financing only, Air Force, Navy, and others Signed by year: 2000: $9,835,797; 2001: $13,662,347; 2002: $19,509,481; 2003: $15,617,861; 2004: $33,553,061; 2005: $28,096,520; 2006: $1,298,719.

Biggest contracts:
$6,000,000 with Army for Maintenance, Repair or Alteration of Real Property -- Family Housing Facilities. Signed on 2004-11-06. Completion date: 2005-04-29.
$6,000,000 with U.S. Army Corps of Engineers - civil program financing only for Maintenance, Repair or Alteration of Real Property -- Family Housing Facilities. Signed on 2004-11-06. Completion date: 2005-04-29. $3,613,450 with Air Force for Maintenance, Repair or Alteration of Real Property -- Other Administrative Facilities and Service Buildings. Taking place in AL. Signed on 2005-09-27. Completion date: 2007-05-10. $3,500,000 with U.S. Army Corps of Engineers - civil program financing only for Maintenance, Repair or Alteration of Real Property -- Family Housing Facilities. Signed on 2004-10-20. Completion date: 2005-04-29.

For a company with all of that money from these contracts it is mighty odd that their web site is a blank now...

But the wayback machine gives us some info on the real Billions in contracts:

IMMEDIATE RELEASE
APRIL 13, 2006
Ellis Environmental Group, LC (EEG) based in Jonesville, Florida announced today they have been awarded a new Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract called HERC (Heavy Engineering Repair and Construction). This is a worldwide contract with the Air Force Center for Environmental Excellence (AFCEE). The contract was awarded to 20 firms, and can be worth up to $15 billion over an 8 year ordering period. This contract is the largest won by EEG and eclipses the $4 billion contract awarded to the firm by the United States Air Force two years ago. The company plans to administer the contract from its corporate headquarters in Jonesville. “This contract will most certainly create more jobs for our community” stated Dena D. Marriott, EEG’s public relations manager and human resources director. The company was founded in 1995 and is owned by Rusi B. Charna, Jeffrey P. Bleke (formerly with Environmental Science and Engineering), and James E. Bleke. For further information, EEG can be contacted at 352.332.3888.
Rusi B. Charna, CEO
Jeffrey P. Bleke, President
James E. Bleke, Executive Vice President
Dena D. Marriott, Company Spokesperson

As for who really owns the company?

Top 500 Diversity Owned Businesses in the U.S. -- 2001

#349
Ellis Environmetnal Group, LC
Newberry, FL www.ellisenv.com
Subcontinent Asian American

Your guess is as good as mine...