counter statistics

Saturday, September 15, 2007

Bloggers at the Counter Demonstration to the Anti-War Demonstration



We talked to:

Matt Abe from North Star Liberty

Lazy Gopher Pachyderm.

Kermit from Anti-Strib

Jamie Delton from Delton Digest - who is running for state representative in 65B. I looked at his site, and it seems that his major issue is the Bachmann amendment. I don't think that will help him in that district.

Friday, September 14, 2007

Laura Brod - So-Called "Tax-Cutter" Voting to Increase Hennepin County Taxes for Stadium on the Radio Tomorrow

She will be guest hosting the Final Word with Michael Brodkorb.

This will be tomorrow at 3:00 to 5:00 on AM 1280 the Patriot.

Brod claims to be opposed to tax increases. Actually she's just interested in increasing other people's taxes - in this case Hennepin County. If you want to let her know what you think about her vote on the stadium boondoggle give her a call.

Call in number: 651-289-4488.

Brodkorb announced this on his blog. There have already been several comments noting her vote on the stadium swindle:

# Dave Says:
September 14th, 2007 at 4:21 pm

Hey, give a big hug to Laura for being one of the SCUMBAG PIG TRAITORS who voted to RAM THE TWINS STADIUM DOWN HENNEPIN COUNTY’S THROAT.

Let Laura know how much we appreciate the fact she was one of the RINOs that drilled my wallet, and will CONTINUE to drill my wallet for years to come.

Thank Laura for TAKING AWAY OUR RIGHT, UNDER STATE STATUTE, TO VOTE FOR/AGAINST A REFERENDUM!

Thanks, Laura. Doin’ a hell of a job.
# Dave Says:
September 14th, 2007 at 4:30 pm

Thank Laura, who knew DAMN WELL that over 70% of Hennepin County did NOT want their taxes jacked to build a stadium for millionaire ballplayers and their BILLIONAIRE owner (Pohlad net worth: $2 BILLION).

Thank Laura for helping continue the slide of the Republican Party in Hennepin County, infuriating voters. Don’t think that’s true? Man a phonebank and find out.

Thanks, Laura. Your help in electing John Benson and other freshman DFLers due to the repulsion of the suburban voters against the Republican Party was essential!


Hopefully Dave will call in to the show. Governor Pawlenty of Tax Increases deserves lots of criticism for this as well.

Thursday, September 13, 2007

Barbara Johnson's Transportation Fantasy World

Reading Andy Birkey's Minnesota Monitor article about the amendment to ban inhumane treatment of circus animals, I came across this quote from MInneapolis City Council President Barb Johnson:

"I think it makes our city look like we're at the extreme end of the spectrum, and I think it makes us look like we don't have anything better to do,"

Hmmmm....


Does Barbara Johnnson really believe that we will all be riding around in JPods in 15 to 20 Years?

If you go to the JPOD web site, you'll find a letter written by Johnson on behalf of JPODs (click on "Leadership"). There's another letter there from Hennepin County Commissioner Mark Stenglein.

It should be a concern to Minnesotans that many of our politicians like Barbara Johnson have promoted silly fantasy transportation concepts like JPods.

Wednesday, September 12, 2007

Response from Mary Turck - Editor of the Daily Planet

I am not sure what question is being asked in this extended exchange of e-mails that was forwarded to me. For the record:

1) The inaccuracies in the original article were primarily in names and dates. For example, a 2002 lobbying trip was described as a 2003 lobbying trip. Brad Pass was misidentified as Alan Pass. There were enough mistakes of this sort, and general criticism of the article's tone and substance, that I pulled the article for review and revision.

2) In reviewing the article, what I considered the substance of the article was verified. The rewrite made the article substantially longer. Some parts that were less central to the article were cut. The paragraph regarding the lawyers was one that I regarded as peripheral to the main points of the article.

Response from Mayor's Staff Jeremy Hanson

After reading Avidor's excellent posts about the Twin Cites Daily Planet yanking an article for corrections in response to complaints from what appeared to be the Mayor's PR Flack, Jeremy Hanson, I decided to follow up. I sent this email to Jeremy Hanson's City of Minneapolis email address.

Hi Jeremy:

On the record:

Was this comment posted on the Twin Cities Daily Planet website from
you? Were you acting on the Mayor's behalf, or as an individual?

Eva Young
Lloydletta's Nooz
http://lloydletta.blogspot.com

submitted by Jeremy Hanson (not verified) on Tue, 08/28/2007 - 12:11.

I'm disappointed and surprised that such an inaccurate article is featured on the TC Daily Planet. Are there no quality controls here? The line between news and opinion is clearly blurred in this piece and readers are left with misinformation about an important and positive project that will be a good thing for our city.


Hanson responded:

"Hanson, Jeremy J."
3:13 pm (3½ hours ago)
Yes, as I often do in my role with the Mayor, I provided public feedback to the TC Daily Planet about their initial article on the Midtown Eco Energy facility. The Daily Planet is a wonderful and valuable news resource, but that article included inaccuracies that needed to be addressed.

I also provided feedback to the Daily Planet because the Midtown Eco Energy facility is an important and positive project that will be a good thing for our city and is worthy of accurate reporting.
-------------------
Jeremy Hanson
Communications Director
Mayor R.T. Rybak
350 South Fifth Street, Room 331
Minneapolis, MN 55415
612-673-2785 phone
612-919-8261 mobile
612-673-2305 fax
jeremy.hanson@ci.minneapolis.mn.us


I followed up with another question:

Your comment wasn't specific about what was inaccurate in that article. What were the problems? It seemed that the reporter talked to a number of people - and got a variety of perspectives.

So what specifically were the "inaccuracies" that needed to be addressed?

Eva Young


So far, I have NOT gotten a response.

As Ken Avidor reported earlier, this was what got deleted from the article:

More questions arise about the project’s legal counsel, the Smith Partners law firm. The firm was criticized by community groups for serving as project manager for the construction of the 35W access project. Although the firm has no transportation planning experience, they represent Abbot Northwestern, Allina, and other corporations that stand to profit from the proposed freeway construction on Lake Street. Kandiyohi plans to sell steam heat energy to these same corporations.


Why was this deleted?

I assume this means Jeremy Hanson was doing this as part of his job duties. Why is it part of the Mayor's Agenda to intimidate citizen journalists?

Developing. . .

Tuesday, September 11, 2007

Prostitute Tells of Affair with David Vitter

VitterFrontPage

Here's the story at the New Orleans Times-Pacayune.

Wendy Yow Ellis said she met Vitter through an escort service and saw him two to three times a week in an apartment at Dauphine and Dumaine streets in the French Quarter. Vitter was elected to the U.S. House in May 1999 and sworn in to office June 8.

At first, Ellis said, he knew her only by her stage name: Leah.

Ellis said the affair ended "abruptly" when she gave him her real name. She shares a first name with his wife, Wendy Baldwin Vitter.

"When I asked him if he would like to carry this beyond the business, I gave him my name and phone number. I said, 'My real name is Wendy,' and he said, 'Oh my God,'" Ellis recalled. "I did see him a few times at the club I danced at after that. He just kind of gave me a look of disbelief."

Ellis, 34, spoke at a press conference in Beverly Hills hosted by Larry Flynt, the publisher of the magazine Hustler. Flynt uncovered Vitter's phone number in the records of a Washington, D.C., escort service this summer, and he will pay Ellis to share details of her trysts with Vitter in the magazine.

Flynt said Tuesday that he wants to expose hypocrisy among politicians who run on a platform of conservative values while carrying on extramarital affairs in their private lives.

"It is not a question of muckraking and exposing the perverts," Flynt said. "It's more than that. It is trying to maintain some honesty in the government.


How will the Senate Republican Leadership and New Orleans Republican party respond?

NEW ORLEANS -- Analysts said the political future of U.S. Sen. David Vitter again was thrown into question Tuesday after a former New Orleans prostitute vouched in person that the senator was one of her former clients.

"It's just a continuous drip of information, allegations, contradictions that are beyond his control," said Silas Lee, a New Orleans political analyst. "The question is what's the tolerance of voters."

When Vitter's sex scandal broke out in July after he acknowledged that his Washington telephone number showed up on the phone records of an escort service, political observers thought Vitter could weather the maelstrom.

Since then, though, the atmosphere surrounding Vitter and the Republican Party has become more dire because of the guilty plea in an airport sex sting by Sen. Larry Craig, R-Idaho.

And the new dynamics may mean trouble from Vitter.

His survival has become "definitely more complicated," said Elliott Stonecipher, a Shreveport political analyst.

With Republicans reeling, they will take measures to save the GOP's image and keep the sex scandals from tainting the rest of the party, Stonecipher said. "Vitter could become the guy the party throws under the bus to keep the discussion where it is."


Norm Coleman should be called for comment on this one.

Dueling Spin on Poll Results

MN Publius and the Drama Queen duke it out over the latest poll results on the Minnesota Senate Race.

MDE commenters weigh in:

# Zack Says:
September 11th, 2007 at 11:45 am

A four percent lead is not “comfortable”. And Coleman is below 50% in both matchups. That is the sign of an incumbent in trouble.

Your spin is pathetic.
# Trompo Says:
September 11th, 2007 at 12:14 pm

Pathetic is an understatement. Let’s look at the recent polls from Rasmussen and Survey USA:

Coleman–Franken

May 14 Poll: 54-32 Coleman (22 point lead)
July 30 Poll: 49-42 Coleman (7 point lead)
Sept. 6 Poll: 46-41 Coleman (5 point lead)

Coleman–Ciresi

May 14 Poll: 52-29 Coleman (23 point lead)
July 30 Poll: 48-42 Coleman (6 point lead)
Sept. 6 Poll: 46-42 Coleman (4 point lead)

Do we need to draw some line graphs here?

I can only imagine what the headlines would say if the polls had substituted Wes for Norm. Good lord. This is so laughable.
# Zack Says:
September 11th, 2007 at 12:15 pm

Also, Franken’s unfavorable’s are only ONE POINT higher than Coleman. This is NOT statistically significant. The poll has a margin of error of 4.5%, meaning Coleman’s unfavs could easily 2 or 3 points higher than Franken’s.

Essentially, this poll means that Franken and Coleman’s unfavs are the same.
# MplsSteve Says:
September 11th, 2007 at 12:20 pm

Michael-

I hate to agree with the DFL on anything but I don’t see a 4-5 point lead as being “comfortable” either.

in fact, it’s a little alarming that Franken polls as well as he does.

Hillary Clinton Returns Dirty Money Under Pressure

NPR:

Morning Edition, September 11, 2007 · Democratic presidential hopeful Sen. Hillary Clinton will return thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from an embattled fundraiser.

Norman Hsu, who picked up $850,000 in campaign contributions for Sen. Clinton, D-N.Y., was arrested last week after tying to escape sentencing on a decade-old criminal charge.

Clinton's campaign said on Monday that the arrest and allegations that Hsu engaged in an illegal investment scheme aided the decision to return the funds.

"In light of recent events and allegations that Mr. Hsu engaged in an illegal investment scheme, we have decided out of an abundance of caution to return the money he raised for our campaign," read a statement by spokesman Howard Wolfson.

A total of 260 donors will get their contributions back.

Sen. Clinton is the first to return money that's considered tainted because Hsu raised it. Her campaign also said its top bundlers – those who raise the money – will be subject to criminal background checks.


Jason Lewis was ranting about this story today.

WaPo:

Clinton "simply didn't want to have to keep answering questions about a bundler whose background is now clearly in question," a senior adviser said, speaking on the condition of anonymity.

Although Clinton will return the money raised by Hsu, Wolfson said the individual contributors could make new donations.

"We will accept their contributions and ask them to confirm for our records that they are from their own personal funds," he said in an e-mail.

Clinton's campaign chairman, Terence R. McAuliffe, declined requests to explain how Hsu had become so prominent in her fundraising.

A portion of the money, at least $29,300, will be returned to members of a single family -- the Paws -- who live modestly in a small house near the San Francisco airport. The Paw family members first attracted attention to Hsu because they were writing large checks to the Clinton campaign even though they held such modest jobs as a postal carrier and a nurse.

It is illegal for a bundler to reimburse donors for the campaign checks they write because it would violate strict federal limits on how much an individual can donate to a candidate.

Lawrence Barcella, a Washington lawyer who has defended Hsu against allegations that he was funneling money back to the Paws in exchange for their donations, said the Paws had other sources of income to support their hefty schedule of giving, which included more than $200,000 in checks to scores of other Democratic candidates over the past four years.

Others expected to get their money back include a range of employees for various firms -- most in the apparel industry -- that have been connected to Hsu. And there are many more who have regularly appeared among Hsu's stable of donors, such as the owners of a San Francisco gift shop, the Lim family, whose connections to him are unclear.

A report emerged yesterday that the Clinton campaign ignored warnings about Hsu. Earlier this summer, Democratic Party officials raised questions with the campaign about whether Hsu had been involved in an illegal Ponzi scheme, according to a source familiar with the exchange. (The Los Angeles Times first reported yesterday that a Clinton finance director for the West Coast brushed aside questions about Hsu.)

The source, who would speak only on the condition of anonymity, said the Clinton finance team did a second search of public records looking for any problems based on the allegations and found none. The campaign did not directly talk to Hsu about the allegations, the source said.

Kent Cooper, the Federal Election Commission's former chief of public disclosure, said Clinton's move to shed the tainted money was "a stunning development" certain to affect other campaigns in what is shaping up to be the most expensive election in history. The presidential candidates in both parties raised about a quarter-billion dollars in the first half of this year.

"The financial controls of these campaigns as they get bigger and bigger and raise more money need more resources," Cooper said. "It is a smart move by the Clinton campaign . . . to try to get ahead of the issue and claim some leadership on double-checking fundraisers and activities.

"To seek permission to do criminal backgrounds indicates a willingness to take more responsibility for the personal actions of these big fundraisers out in the field and will bring extreme pressure on other candidates to more carefully monitor and control their fundraisers," he said.


LA Times
:

The New York senator's campaign staff had pondered the move for several days but acted after Clinton awoke Monday to a report in the Los Angeles Times that the FBI was examining a Hsu venture in which some investors said they had been pressured to make political donations to her.

"She saw that an investigation was proceeding and personally instructed us to sever all connections with Hsu and his network of donors," said a campaign source familiar with the events who was not authorized to discuss internal campaign dealings.

Before the announcement, new evidence surfaced that the Clinton camp had dismissed allegations about Hsu made by a Southern California businessman. In an e-mail obtained by The Times, a Clinton campaign staffer told a California Democratic Party official in June that the businessman's concerns were unwarranted.

"I can tell you with 100 certainty that Norman Hsu is NOT involved in a ponzi scheme," wrote Samantha Wolf, who was a campaign finance director for the Western states."He is COMPLETELY legit."

In fact, Hsu was a fugitive wanted on a 15-year-old bench warrant stemming from an early 1990s investment fraud case.

The businessman's query prompted Clinton staffers to review public records about Hsu, but no problems surfaced, the campaign source said. In part because of that incident, the campaign also announced Monday that it would institute more stringent procedures to vet major contributors, including running criminal background checks.

Stanley Brand, a former House counsel who often represents legislators in ethics matters, called the Clinton campaign's decision "a ground-shifting event," though not a step he would have recommended.

"I understand it's politically driven. They don't want to be tainted," he said. "But they're going to give back a lot of money if they do this every time there's an allegation against a fundraiser."


Kudos to the LA Times, which was turning over rocks on this story.

Monday, September 10, 2007

Massachusettes Theocrats Go After Mitt Romney for Flip Flopping

Pam Spaulding has the story.

The Mitt Romney report exposes Romney's flip flops on gay and abortion issues.

This site includes a letter from Romney to the Massachusettes Log Cabin Republicans. At that time, he agreed to co-sponsor the Employment Non-Descrimination Act - and broaden the bill to include housing and credit. He also stated in general terms a need to move towards allowing gays to serve openly in the military.

This letter does not address the issue of marriage. Here's my question for Mitt Romney - has he changed his positions on discrimination and on allowing gays to serve openly in the military?

Here's the Free Republic Thread on an article Brian Caemaker from Mass Resistance posted on Romney.

"Who knows what he is. He said one thing when running for office in Mass and when talking to Massachusetts log cabiners."

No, he didn’t. But you would like for him to have, wouldn’t you?

He said he supported equal employment rights for gays. He has always been opposed to gay marriage. And if you can find a single instance where he said he wasn’t, post it.

Otherwise, you’re full of crap. Smoothtalker my arse.

15 posted on 09/09/2007 12:48:09 PM PDT by CheyennePress (Tennesseeans for Romney)


Here's Romney debating Kennedy in 1994. Has he flip flopped? You decide.

Irony

Katherine Kersten wrote a column profiling Peter Swanson of Swanblog. The irony is a while back, she plagiarized one of his blog posts. A guest poster at the Cucking Stool fisks this column.

Rush Limbaugh gets it wrong, very wrong

Rush Limbaugh said on his Monday program, to those who are ‘war weary’, (paraphrased I’ll find the exact quote if I can get a transcript.):

There is no reason to be war weary. Those who are war weary, especially those who aren’t military families, turn off CNN, turn off the network news and stop reading the New York Times because THAT is why you are war weary. If you aren’t from a military family you don’t have any reason or right to be war weary.

NO Mr. Limbaugh, you are flat-out wrong. This war is being fought on behalf of MY country and in the name of MY security, therefore I have every right to question our tactics and results and I have every right to be weary of a war that is being waged in my name seemingly without caring how I feel about it.

Furthermore, not only do I have a right to be weary, I have a moral responsibility to be war weary. For if I become impervious to the death and murder being perpetuated in my name, I will have become as morally bankrupt as those who would so callously dismiss the death, murder and genocide that will occur once we pull out of Iraq. Regardless of which extreme I were to take I would be condoning the sentiment that American lives are more important and/or valuable than the Iraqis.

So thank you Mr. Limbaugh for your contribution to a thriving democracy, but do not attempt to subjugate my moral and ethical compass.

The Twin Cities Daily Planet Revise of Kandiyohi Article

Ten days ago, the TC Daily Planet yanked an investigative article about a proposal for a Phillips wood burning plant promoted by Michael Krause, and relplaced it with this announcement:

CORRECTION: Green Burning or Greenwashing?

An article published on August 27, "Green burning or greenwashing?" contained several errors of fact. We regret the errors, and we have made substantial changes in our editing policy to ensure more careful review of articles written for the Daily Planet. We are in the process of reviewing the article, reverifying sources, interviewing new sources, and rewriting the article, which will appear next week as "CORRECTION: Green burning or greenwashing." The original article has been withdrawn from publication.

Posted: Thu, 08/30/2007 - 23:05


The article was yanked after receiving this comment from City Hall flak catcher, Jeremy Hanson:

----------------

submitted by Jeremy Hanson (not verified) on Tue, 08/28/2007 - 12:11.

I'm disappointed and surprised that such an inaccurate article is featured on the TC Daily Planet. Are there no quality controls here? The line between news and opinion is clearly blurred in this piece and readers are left with misinformation about an important and positive project that will be a good thing for our city.

----------------


You can read the original version of Gordon's original version in this Lloydletta post (thanks Eva for posting it). It was replaced yesterday with this revised article.

The credit at the end of the revised article says "Additional reporting by Mary Turck". There is some additional material including a part about Michael Krause claiming support from the Institute for Local Self Reliance, Clean Water Action and the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy... support which apparently Krause and company don't have:

In an August e-mail to a community member, Michael Krause claimed wide support for the project. "Our project won the unanimous support of the East Phillips neighborhood last month," he wrote, "and also has written letters of support from David Morris at ILSR, Diana McKeown at Clean Water Action, and the Institute for Ag and Trade Policy." The Midtown Eco Energy website says, "The project has support from adjacent neighborhoods as well as leading environmental organizations."

On closer analysis, that support evaporates. The letters cited by Krause date back to 2004, and were written in support of the Green Institute-Phillips Community Energy Cooperative project.

Contacted in August, David Morris said he is not supportive of the project, and has not been in touch with Michael Krause for several years. Morris was on the advisory committee for the project in the beginning stages with the Green Institute, and he says that "a key to the project was that the Phillips Neighborhood would own the project, with equity as part of the DOE grant. Ownership is very important to ILSR. I think that after Michael took the project over to a private developer that that piece no longer exists."

Diana McKeown of Clean Water Action says her group's involvement was also in the early stages. "There were key components we supported," she says. "One that was critical for us was local ownership and trying to give back to the community." She says that Clean Water Action neither supports nor opposes the project today, and that she has asked Krause to stop listing them as supporters.

David Wallinga of the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy says that his organization has no position on the project, neither supporting nor opposing it.


...but then Mary Turck adds this:

Kandiyohi is also in the process of negotiating “good neighbor agreements” with six local community groups. The agreements promise to create seven jobs for neighborhood residents, out of a total of 20 permanent jobs.


"Good neighbor agreements"? What the heck is that? And who is negotiating these agreements? Perhaps there is a clue in what has been removed from Dan Gordon's original article:

More questions arise about the project’s legal counsel, the Smith Partners law firm. The firm was criticized by community groups for serving as project manager for the construction of the 35W access project. Although the firm has no transportation planning experience, they represent Abbot Northwestern, Allina, and other corporations that stand to profit from the proposed freeway construction on Lake Street. Kandiyohi plans to sell steam heat energy to these same corporations.


It will be interesting to see if the TC Daily Planet will cover Kandiyohi's other project that threatens to eat up several small businesses on Eat Street.

Sunday, September 09, 2007

HRC's Hillary Rosen Maxes Out to Anti-Gay Harold Ford

Petrelis Files:



Let's see if we can follow the bouncing logical ball of one Democratic Party lesbian leader as the 2008 presidential race for money heats up.

From the Bay Area Reporter's February 15 issue:

Clinton has the support of Hilary Rosen, another longtime Democratic activist and a member of the governing board of the Human Rights Campaign Foundation. Rosen said she's personally known the Clintons for many years – ever since she babysat for their daughter Chelsea.

"I think she is just practically the smartest, deepest candidate in the race and frankly one of the smartest leaders I've ever met," said Rosen, who for many years served as head of the Recording Industry Association of America [...] "I think she has – on gay issues in particular and as senator for New York– broadened her horizon on the political interests and needs of gays and lesbians. I think, frankly, she's a wonderful person. I know her. I've always liked her."

Rosen said gay issues are her number one criteria in evaluating candidates and that she trusts Clinton to get the United States out of Iraq. Rosen said she is helping raise gay money for Clinton and predicted she will "pay a lot of attention to gay issues."[Emphasis added.]


If Rosen indeed has gay equality at the top of her agenda when sizing up politicians, then why did she donate $1,000 to zealous homophobe, and failed Senatorial candidate, Rep. Harold Ford, Democrat, of Tennessee?
Ford's vile use of his opposition to gay marriage and his strong support for a Tennessee amendment banning marriage equality and state recognition of same-sex relationships has even forced another gay Democrat, David Mixner, to declare recently:

"No one should contribute to the DLC [Democratic Leadership Council] or support it if Ford becomes its new chairman. Ford campaigned saying he would be the first in line to vote for the Tennessee amendment. The LGBT community and it's allies should never forget his advocacy on behalf of these amendments. We also should not give a pass to straight friends who think these actions are no big deal."

To know how low Ford has sunk in his homo-hating ways, one need only look at his ratings from none other than Rosen's own group, HRC.

107th Congress: 100%
108th Congress : 44%
109th Congress : 25%

With an ever-declining pro-gay score from HRC, vocal support to deny gays and lesbians full civil rights, one would think Rosen, who says gay equality is vital to consider before backing a candidate, nevertheless contributed $1,000 to Ford on October 28, 2006, just weeks before he went down to defeat.


He called out DNC treasurer Andy Tobias to defend Rosen:


In a message dated 2/20/2007 5:39:31 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, ATobias writes:

<< MPetrelis asks: Why did lesbian leader Hilary Rosen, former head of RIAA and honcho of the Human Rights Campaign, give money to Rep. Harold Ford in his homophobic and losing bid for a seat in the US Senate? >>

My guess -- having maxed out to him myself -- is that she wanted to win the Senate and thereby (among other things) avoid any more awful lifetime judicial appointments.

(And, noting that Congressman Ford had rated 100% on the HRC scorecard before he started running for Senate, she might have felt that, in his heart, he would be a lot less bad than his opponent.)

It's fine to take the pure stance, as, say, Ralph Nader did, so long as you're okay with bearing responsibility for the consequences (the war in Iraq, etc.).

In this case, the consequence of our not doing all we could to take back the Senate could have been one more right-wing appointment on the Court (not to mention many on the lower Federal courts) that could have blocked our equal rights for decades.

Some will look at the trade-off and, like Nader, conclude: never compromise, no matter what.

Others will look at it and wonder how could people of good will could FAIL to do all they could to try to win back the Senate.

Happily, this question turned out to be moot -- because everything else broke our way and we didn't need the Tennessee seat to gain the majority.

But who could have been sure of that outcome in advance?

Best,

Andy


The whole argument on the courts is bogus, because it looked like Harold Ford would have voted for extremist court nominees.

What always bothered me about Harold Ford is he ran on a "family values" platform, but was known as rather a casanova - with women.

Commenter Joe Hill hits the nail on the head. This is why I am suspicious of HRC:

Joe Hill said...

What's everybody excited about? This is exactly the kind of treachery HRC and its careerist staff and supporters have been practicing since its founding as a wholly-owned subsidiary of the national Democratic Party.

The furthest thing from the minds of these political opportunists is any kind of principled advocacy for the LGBTQ Community. In exchange for their blind obedience to the DNC powers-that-be, these folks can count on receiving invitations to Democratic Party functions where they get 'face time' with the Party movers and shakers who can help them along with their careers.

The Party has found that they can mollify the outrage of the LGBTQ demographic by wining and dining these Judases who claim to represent Gays/Lesbians. They show up to black tie extravaganzas and dinners at the White House (while the Clintons lived there)...pretty heady stuff for members of a scorned minority!

These critters reciprocate by delivering the votes of the Community and by not rocking the Dem Party boat over little things like same-gender marriage or Clinton's "Don't Ask Don't Tell" (Lie and Hide) policy. They are more than willing to accept scraps from the DNC table if it means they can rub elbows with the Harold Fords of the world.

This ain't 'News'...it's business as usual.


Well said.