Huh? What?

You mean I'm supposed to keep this blogging thing going still? Since when?

Okay, it's been a bit of a break enforced by real-life. I have a great thing lined up on the reality v. the rhetoric of pensions, I'll type and buff up in the next few days. However, there's good stuff out there worth reading:

I've dabbled (here and here for starters) in the Globe's inability to talk straight about education, but this guy is doing a comprehensive series on the subject over at BMG. Wow.

Speaking of which, Arne Duncan (whose self-reported success stories fall apart under close scrutiny) cheers on the arbitrary firing of Rhode Island teachers. I wonder if the Obama Administration would be so enthusiastic if the victims were financiers rather than teachers. As I note here, the Globe's reaction is that this is a blunt questionable reaction that is nonetheless a good idea.

If you want to learn what real government waste looks like, check out this publicly built, brand-new $160 million airport in Japan that hosts... one flight per day.

RedMassGroup shows its true feelings -- remember when offices didn't belong to the holder, but they were all "the people's seat"?

Why is it that I read the headline "US school cancels prom because of 'lesbian date'" as a headline, I just know that this school will be located south of DC?

And of course, I could never say no to noternie (purveyor of Someday I Will). That's coming up soon.

It boggles the mind

George W. Bush's former chief of staff is running to replace Ted Kennedy in the Senate. If there is a political sentence that reads "dooooomed" more pithily than that, I don't know it.

This is a supposedly serious guy from a supposedly serious party pretending to make a sincere run for a seat, and it's beyond ridiculous.

It's like Karl Marx's publisher going for Chair of the Chamber of Commerce. It's Jerry Remy interviewing to manage the Yankees.

This is the most fantastically doomed campaign that I can think of...take a vengefully Democratic state, a seat linked to the Kennedy family based in that state, and plop in a guy chin-deep with the most pathetically incompetent Republican administration in living history. If Card does everything right, and the Democratic nominee plays "Old McDonald" on a juice harp throughout the entire debate, the nominee still wins.

I understand that Card is ambitious, but the friends-n-family advantage from growing up in Holbrooke can't equal the disadvantage of being a Dubya lackey in Massachusetts. He'd be better carpet-bagging in some loser state that won't admit how much Bush sucked.

What a loser.

Geez, Dad

Less than 12 hours after Alan Wilson kicked off his campaign for South Carolina Attorney General, his Dad embarrassed himself by heckling the President in the Congressional Chamber. Shouting at the President in the midst of a Congressional speech probably won't play so hot in that part of the country, where bigotry is fine as long as it remain polite. This wasn't polite.

Now, the newly minted candidate will be choosing whether to throw his dad under the bus, or give a thumbs-up to this Neanderthal behavior. I know they don't much cotton to President Obama in the Palmetto State, but I don't imagine this is the first day on the campaign trail that Daddy's Boy had in mind. Couldn't happen to a nicer family (and it wouldn't either...)

The President's Speech...lesson ideas

The Empty Right in Washington has chosen to ignore producing actual solutions on everything from the budget to health care, and is instead focusing on their latest fake outrage: the idea that a Democratic President (an African-American one, no less!) would tell students to stay in school. This is certainly more outrageous than President Bush, Sr., already campaigning for re-election, indoctrinating students to support his plan to aimlessly tinker with reform education by sitting them down in front of television screens back in 1991.

Of course, some of the richer conservatives have figured out that the sooner a child drops out of school, the less education s/he has, the more likely they are to vote Republican. So it's in their interest that students not stay in school; indeed some parents are using Obama's speech as a pretext for that effort to dumb down children enough to vote Republican when they are of age by keeping them away from that awful non-white man's plan to tell them not to drop out.

Now, this all surpasses ridiculous, but in an age where these people are not called for their foolishness by the powers that be, educators have to work around them. thus, I would borrow Bush's proclamation on the "controversy" over teaching evolution versus...something baldly unscientific...by "teaching the controversy".

Hopefully all public school teachers will seize this moment to expose students to the public dialogue concerning their education. Democrats in Utah ("a call by our nation’s highest elected official for our children to work hard and live up to their full potential is surely something all of us can agree on regardless of party affiliation") and Republicans in Florida ("President Obama has turned to American's children to spread his liberal lies, indoctrinating American's youngest children") have clearly laid out their cases...why not let students decide for themselves who is right? Or is that the kind of education that Republicans fidn so objectionable?

Time to mock the DGA

I earlier mocked the Executive Director of the Republican Governors' Association for this quote:

Charlie Baker in Massachusetts. He’s a CEO of Harvard Pilgrim Health Care, has done a lot of nonprofit work in the healthcare, and is a brilliant business man and someone who I believe can cut beyond party and racial lines and say,

To think that a CEO candidate is a good thing is sooo 1999. I like how he throws in the line on "cutting across racial lines" when talking about one of the whiter states of the union. I wonder if he'd have said that if the Democratic incumbent weren't white.

Now, on the flipside, we have this gem from Nathan Daschle, the Exec Director of the Democratic Governors' Association:

Gov. [Deval] Patrick in Massachusetts is another who has a bright future, who is regarded as a leader in the party.

This may be bad luck for bad timing for Daschle, but lauding as a "leader in the party" a governor who is trusted by about one third of Massachusetts Democrats on taxes and health care over his opponents isn't a guy with a bright future to me. He's looking closer to another Christie Todd Whitman -- a once bright future fading into a "what happened to..." file.

These guys should really not talk about the Bay State. We're going to be choosing from the least-worst for governor, and it's embarrassing to spin it otherwise.

Cahill bails, everyone loses

Apparently Tim isn't tough enough for a Democratic primary. Sure, the deck was stacked against him, but he's re-registered out of the Democratic Party in preparation of an all-but-definite run for the governorship.

I figure nearly everyone loses:

• Cahill loses his job, and his bid for the governor.
• Deval Patrick supporters lose any impetus to reflect on their concept of the Democratic Party.
• Old-school Democrats lose their strongest representative in the conversation within the party.
• The Democratic Party's tent gets smaller.

Only Deval Patrick wins, which means that many prolific bloggers will celebrate this as a great day.

First off, I'm not voting for Cahill. If he isn't tough enough to take on Deval in a primary, he isn't tough enough to take on the problems facing this state. His infatuation with predatory gambling is nearly an addiction in its own right, and he is a cipher on too many issues. But beyond that, Cahill is running just to the left of the Republicans and just to the right of Deval. If the ideological field is going to be split that finely, the election comes down to organization and machine, something the Democrats and Deval Patrick have to spare.

What this does mean, however, is a pull to accompany a pre-existing push on many Democrats. There is a traditionalist view of the Democratic Party that predates my birth or Deval's move to Massachusetts. It's the view that a man (or woman) could count of the Democratic Party to make sure s/he could put food on the table, back up his/her right to be in a union to do it, and otherwise leave them alone. The Dems were for the common man, but they weren't going to tell the common man how to run his life.

That school of thought has been a subject of attack by Deval Patrick's followers, who love bureaucratic expansion, basing sales taxes on calorie count (soda, for example), loathe labor organization, and have the solution to any number of social issues. I'm not saying they're all wrong, but there's a lot of wrong in that approach. In addition, their palpable condescension for any other point of view than what they've newly discovered is a real push on the Democrats who built this party in the 50s and 60s.

Now these people being pushed out have somewhere to go -- the Tim Cahill campaign. Cahill is kind of a Democrat, and he's no Republican. He's not going to call you a cynic or a naysayer because you disagree with him, and he's not going to tell you he knows how you should live your life better than you do.

All of which is probably going to be very attractive to thousands of Democrats who are treated as pariahs in their own party -- the party many of them built before a dry run was needed for Obama's campaign. So as the Devalcolytes push these folks away from the party, the Cahillians are going to pull them into their campaign. Sure, it may only be 5-10% of the electorate, but that makes a difference in close State House and county races. Who knows -- if Cahill gets his head straight about gambling and education, I may be part of that 5-10%.

Of course, in December 2010 Cahill's campaign is dead, and his political future likely will be, too. The Democratic Party's "big tent" will have shrunk, and there will be a large group of people looking for a political home as the Cahill campaign is subject to electoral forclosure.

And if the Republican Party ever pulls its head out of its a--, those people are their ticket back to relevance. So I guess it's not just Deval who wins.

(Update): Blogging compatriot Charley on the MTA over at BMG has kindly linked to this post calling me an "inveterate Deval hater". The emoticon makes it clear that the comment is meant tongue in cheek. I think. Either way, it helps support some of my points.

On taxes and toughness...weekend blather

• Republican morons are rending their garments over the idea of accused quasi-terrorists being moved from Guantanamo to American supermax prisons, anything-goes houses where the most dangerous Americans in the world are housed. Some of whom, I rather imagine, have killed more Americans than any of these guys. I imagine I'm supposed to be scared at the idea one of the fellas might escape. Not sure why -- am I supposed to think that this guy is somehow going to find a way home to the other side of the planet, or that he'll resume his maybe-terrorist career right then and there? Because a dark-skinned man with a thick Central Asian accent would have no trouble buying large amounts of fertilizer in the wake of a terrorist escape. In any case, it cracks me up that Republicans believe that a recently escaped Afghani wandering around Marion, Illinois in prison garb, speaking almost no English, with no money, and unfamiliar with American cultural norms would be a real danger. I'm a lot more worried about what might happen with an escaped Charles Manson -- a man we know is a murderer who is familiar with American culture, educated, with a number of admirers still in this country -- than these guys in Guantanamo. Yet he's here, and they are there. Crazy.
  
  
• At my second home at BMG, I explain why I have trouble taking Deval Patrick's tough talk relative to the Lege seriously, and why I don't think they have reason to take him seriously, either. He had a golden opportunity to change the face of the Legislature during last month's special election primary for Sal DiMasi's old seat. Deval and his people sat on the sidelines and watched the machine keep a vulnerable seat. Unless Patrick & Co. are going to give legislators notice that they will work to unseat them when possible, they won't be listened to.
  
  
• For that matter, the more I think about the sales tax hike, the less upset I become. That's partially because I lived in Montreal, which features a total sales tax above 15% on most goods to pay for a crap health care system. Also, most of your essential expenses are not subject to sales tax in the Bay State -- mortgage or rent, supermarket food, health care, gasoline, heat, etc. The sales tax affect discretionary spending mainly, so it's not as if this is affecting working class folks in ways they can't avoid -- the way that an income tax hike would.
  
  
• The only long-term solution to revenue shortfall is progressive income taxes, where everyone pays a fair share. Jamie Eldridge and Sonia Chang-Diaz pointed this out in the Globe recently.
  
  
• Speaking of which, State Senator Chang-Diaz is emerging as an interesting case. On taxes, she is voting more with the governor's position and not that of the Legislative leaders. Given that the power rests with the leaders, and that Deval endorsed her criminally indicted opponent with a history of playing things fast and loose during the primary, she really doesn't owe him much. All of which leads me to presume that Senator Chang-Diaz is voting along her sense of what is right or wrong. Good for her.
  
  
• I'm adding "Massachusetts Liberal" to my blogroll. Check it out for stuff such as this:
  
  

  What the GOP is apparently incapable of doing in Massachusetts is consistently recruiting and electing a farm team, people willing to run for state representative and senate. [Weld and Romney] lost interest in the job and put personal gain over creating a team that could actually develop into a credible minority party.

  
  
  MaLib does a great job tracing the history of failure that is the Republican Party's misadventures in Legislative elections. I would add that this is the closest comparison we have to the status of Deval Patrick's 2008 promises to remake the tired politics of Massachusetts.
  
  
• Somebody who works for Tim Cahill put a lot -- a lot of resources into capturing the chairmanship of the Plymouth County Democratic League. Four years ago, that body was led by a guy named John Walsh. Huh. On the other hand, his campaign committee website isn't working at the moment...if anyone has a way to get in touch with Cahill via phone or email that doesn't require going through the treasurer's office, I'd appreciate it if you would send it to
  

As I'm sure you've noticed...

The Republican response to Obama's address to Congress included this bit:



wherein Gov. Piyush Jindal (R-LA) criticized spending on "something called volcano monitoring" as if it were some useless expenditure. Well, you know what's coming...

A volcano in southern Alaska erupted anew Monday, the fifth eruption since coming back to life Sunday night. Agencies including the Federal Aviation Administration, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the U.S. Geological Survey were monitoring the situation...

The first [concern] is the ash clouds' effect on air traffic in the vicinity of the volcano. Aircraft carrying a total of roughly 20,000 passengers fly through the area on any given day, Salazar said...The second area of concern is for people on the ground near the mountain, he said, but noted that most residents know what precautions to take, as experts have been warning of an eruption for some time.

...In Anchorage, about 100 miles from the volcano, residents were getting ready for ash.The ash cloud was moving north, missing the bulk of the population in south-central Alaska, Murray said.

"We are continuing to watch the volcano very closely," he said. "We could have several more phases, such as we've seen."

"It does pose significant problems for mechanical systems, people with respiratory illnesses and aircraft," he said, adding that residents should be prepared to stay indoors.

Those lousy government big spenders, insisting on interfering with God's plan to kill Alaskan asthmatics with volcano ash.

Shallow weekend thoughts

• Utah Gov. Huntsman is the Mike Huckabee of 2012 -- a lucid, reasonable, friendly Republican. He even goes Huckabee one step further by toning down the hidden fanaticism...he's endorsing civil union for same-sex couples. Oh, and check this radical proposal that Republicans should contribute ideas of their own, rather than reject the President's...wow.
• I hadn't realized that the Mongolian Embassy in Washington, D.C. had contacted "Mayor Anthony A.Williams about the possibility of erecting of a statue of Chinggis Khaan [Genghis Khan] in Washington D.C in honor of his contribution to the world civilization in 2005. As the Embassy of Mongolia is now working to add its national hero’s name in the list of Monuments in Washington D.C., we would welcome your comments on the idea of erecting the statue of Chinggis Khaan..." While I admire the great contributions and leadership of Chinggis Khaan, I will admit that a statue of a 13th century Asian conqueror would be a surprise to come across in D.C.
  
• Ever since Sal DiMasi got cashiered shortly after opposing casino interests, the de facto leader of the Opposition here in the Commonwealth has been Treasurer Tim Cahill. Most of his ideas are not that bright, particularly his keystone concept of warehouse-like slot machine parlors. Megaresorts such as Mohegan Sun put out the ritz to attract the high rollers, the "whales", as well as the middle class looking for spectacle. A warehouse is squarely aimed at gambling addicts who can't afford to play. Not a good idea, no more than the idea that anonymous people around Cahill are rumored by the Globe to be considering an independent bid for governor in 2010, either. All that said...it's nice to have somebody challenging the governor. Heaven knows the Massachusetts Republicans obviously can't do it (called out by the Healey-McCain Herald, no less!) and with DiMasi gone, somebody had to step up. Their eager distortion of that independent bid tidbit, complete with editing out relevant quotes that detract from the persecution complex, is proof enough of blind loyalty. This is a cult of personality that would do Gaius Baltar proud, but cripples our ability to focus on issues rather than slogans.
• Speaking of which, last week's episode of BSG had too much crying, not enough doing. Next week better be, well, better. The whole series ends in two episodes...and with BSG gone, and Leverage off until June, the television turns off for a while over to March Madness, then the NBA Finals, then...
• Gaming out costs by day -- whether it's tax rate restoration or gas tax hikes or anything else, is dishonest in my mind. Almost anything sounds cheap if you divide it by 365. It might sound crazy to donate $200 to me every year to keep this blog going, but keep in mind that's less than a donut per day!
• I'm musing this idea: a basket of 1 stock each from CitiGroup, AIG, Wachovia, and ING would cost $9.27 right now. If I were to purchase some 30 "baskets" right now on the bet that if even one of these companies survives the next 18 months, their stock will restore to a spot where I could sell the whole lot for profit. As the old saying goes, "the time to buy is when there's blood on the streets."
  
• We have way too many stores already, as evidenced by the failures of Circuit City, Steve & Barry's, KB Toys, and Linens'n'Things. So which stores do the fine people of West Bridgewater expect to come into the retail center they just voted to approve?
• Yes, you too can support Roland Burris's 2010 run for Senator! Thus far, the only portions of the website that work are his biography and donation link. Nothing on issues or endorsements.
• It's astounding how many Obama nominees screwed up their taxes. It's also astounding how "didn't adequately itemize minor items and violated byzantine codicils in the tax code" has become "didn't pay their taxes," as if it were volition and not inadequate counseling.
• Question here -- every day or so I'm tooling down the highway when we come up to a construction area with a police officer staring down the hole that's been dug, or sitting in the cruiser with the lights on. Everyone slows down to 65. I've never been sure if said officer has the liberty to leave the construction scene which s/he is being paid to observe and chase off after a speeder. And for those times s/he is outside the vehicle, how would even be possible to generate a speed to write on the driver's ticket? Do we even have to worry about this happening?
• "I'm Yours" by Jason Mraz has to be the most cloying, saccharin, desperate stuffing of pretentious cuteness into 3 minutes 20 seconds of banal lyrics and unnoticeable music that's been released in decades. If this is what he turns out after 7 years releasing albums, he should just quit. Ugh.
  

The Curious Giving of Charlie Baker

I can't help finding Massachusetts Republicans fascinating, I really can't. So more on them. Charlie Baker is returning to his Desk of Indecision as talk opens up about the 2010 race for governor. There is a "Draft Charlie" website, with Facebook and Twitter -- but no donation link yet. Massachusetts Liberal is impressed:

Charlie Baker is the real deal. He served as secretary of health and human services and administration and finance under Bill Weld. In the private sector, he delivered Harvard Pilgrim from receivership.

Unlike the past four Republican governors he has the street cred when it comes to knowing how to run a bureaucracy and a business (and knowing where the bodies are buried). He knows how to blog. He also has a commitment to making it in Massachusetts.

Of course, Baker is only a danger if he enters the race. he already hemmed and hawed his way through much of 2005 before declining a run in 2006. While Baker is considering it again, he really has to enter the race unless he wants to become Massachusetts' version of Richard Blumenthal. Short of a vicious primary battle between Deval and Tim Cahill, I don't see how Baker wins.

Anyway, one of my first stops on the "get-to-know-the-candidate" tour is the OCPF and FEC databases. Here is what I found -- since the beginning of 2006, Baker has put about $60,000 of his dollars into Republican campaigns around the country -- and less than one-sixth of it is going toward local Republicans:

The spending is sporadic with only a couple in-state donations throughout all of 2007, and not coming close to what Baker can afford to give. If one breaks down Baker's state- and federal-level donations in 2008, this is what one sees:
GOP candidates outside Mass: $12,300
Mass. GOP candidates/PACs for US Congress:$7,500
Mass. GOP State Sen/Rep with no challenger: $1,700
Mass. GOP State Sen/Rep with Dem challenger: $900
Mass. GOP Challengers for State House: $750
Other (PACs, other offices): $800
Total donations in 2008: $23,950

What really jumps out at me is the second line. Talk about pissing money away. The Mass. GOP is on life support, and why a possible knight-in-armor is blowing his donations on wild goose chases rather than the hard and vital work of getting people into office is beyond me. He spends more on State House incumbents than on GOP challengers! Spending that will improve fortunes for Massachusetts Republicans clearly isn't high on the list of Baker's priorities.

Of the couple dozen Republicans who in 2008 sought to take an open or Democratic seat in the State House, Baker supported...three. In other words, he invested more in unopposed incumbents than in Republicans trying to grow the party. Baker has invested a titanic amount in the hilarious and incompetent Republican attempts to win a Congressional seat.

I don't know what Republicans want. I wouldn't be surprised to see them invest their dreams in a man who is spending money on every possible function of the Republican party other than a realistic attempt to revive itself. But it is kind of an odd thing, ain't it?

Below are the results of OCPF (Massachusetts) and FEC (federal) contribution reports on Charlie Baker:

OCPF

3/9/2006 Republican State Committee, MA $65.00
3/28/2006 Jones Jr., Bradley H. $200.00
4/22/2006 Knapik, Michael R. $300.00
4/22/2006 Peterson Jr., George N. $300.00
4/27/2006 Smola, Todd $300.00
6/9/2006 Barrows, Fred J. $250.00
8/30/2006 Hillman, Reed V. $500.00
9/1/2006 MA Republican House PAC $500.00
9/19/2006 Healey, Kerry Murphy $500.00
9/25/2006 Republican State Committee, MA $2,500.00
10/21/2006 Lees, Brian $250.00
10/25/2006 Villamaino III, Enrico John $200.00
2006 total: $5,865.00

3/6/2007 Tisei, Richard R. $300.00
5/5/2007 Knapik, Michael R. $200.00
2007 total: $500.00

1/11/2008 Tarr, Bruce $300.00 Unopposed Incumbent for State Senate
2/28/2008 Blaisdell , John $500.00 Challenger to Dem Incumbent
3/20/2008 MA Republican House PAC $300.00 PAC
5/22/2008 Bennett, Doug $500.00 Candidate for City Council
6/18/2008 Brown, Scott P. $300.00 Incumbent Senator, Dem Challenger
7/31/2008 Lees, Brian $200.00 Unopposed Incumbent for State Senate
8/2/2008 Peterson Jr., George N. $300.00 Unopposed Incumbent for State Rep
8/7/2008 Barrows, Fred J. $300.00 Incumbent Rep, Dem Challenger
8/26/2008 Jones Jr., Bradley H. $300.00 Incumbent Rep, Dem Challenger
8/28/2008 Smola, Todd $300.00 Incumbent GOP State Rep, unopposed
10/9/2008 Pope, Susan W. $250.00 GOP challenger to Dem incumbent state rep
2008 total: $3,550


FEC

BAKER, CHARLES
SWAMPSCOTT, MA 01907
HARVARD PILGRIM HEALTH CARE/CEO

MASSACHUSETTS REPUBLICAN STATE CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE
	06/08/2006	1000.00	26950355755
	08/29/2006	2500.00	26940339415
	09/25/2006	-2500.00	26950657214
	12/19/2006	1000.00	27940116945
	02/27/2007	3000.00	27930342695
	02/04/2008	3000.00	28990592040
	11/04/2008	2000.00	28993358959

BAKER, CHARLES
SWAMPSCOTT, MA 01907
HARVARD PILGRIM HEALTH CARE/HEALT

JOHNSON, NANCY L. VIA JOHNSON FOR CONGRESS COMMITTEE
	06/12/2006	500.00	26930408529

BAKER, CHARLES
SWAMPSCOTT, MA 01907
HARVARD PILGRIM HEALTHCARE/EXECUT

BRADLEY, JOSEPH E. MR. III VIA JEB BRADLEY FOR CONGRESS COMMITTEE
	10/07/2008	500.00	28992932379

BAKER, CHARLES
SWAMPSCOTT, MA 01907
HARVARD PILGRIM/C. E. O.

COLLINS, SUSAN M VIA COLLINS FOR SENATOR
	09/11/2008	1000.00	28020510075

BAKER, CHARLES
SWAMPSCOTT, MA 01907
HARVARD PILGRIM/EXECUTIVE

BARTON, RICHARD W VIA RICK BARTON FOR CONGRESS COMMITTEE
	02/08/2006	500.00	28930066850

BAKER, CHARLES
SWAMPSCOTT, MA 01907
HARVARD PILGRIM/HEALTH CARE

BECH, NATHAN ALEXANDER VIA COMMITTEE TO ELECT NATHAN BECH; THE
	06/08/2008	1000.00	28932181972

OGONOWSKI, JAMES VIA OGONOWSKI FOR CONGRESS
	08/27/2007	1000.00	27931292333

BAKER, CHARLES
SWAMPSCOTT, MA 01907
HOWARD PILGRIM HEALTH CARE/HEALTH

COLEMAN, NORM VIA COLEMAN FOR SENATE 08
	10/09/2008	500.00	28020700483

BAKER, CHARLES
SWAMPSCOTT, MA 01907
INFO. REQ./INFO. REQ.

COLEMAN, NORM VIA COLEMAN FOR SENATE 08
	05/16/2008	2000.00	28020352865

BAKER, CHARLES D
SWAMPSCOTT, MA 01907
HARVARD PILGRIM HEALTH CARE/EXECU

SUNUNU, JOHN E VIA TEAM SUNUNU
	06/02/2006	500.00	26020491203

BAKER, CHARLES D
SWAMPSCOTT, MA 01907
HARVARD PILGRIM HEALTH CARE/PRESI

SUNUNU, JOHN E VIA TEAM SUNUNU
	03/19/2008	1000.00	28020153158
	09/21/2008	2300.00	28020520745

BAKER, CHARLES D
SWAMPSCOTT, MA 01907
HARVARD PILGRIM HEALTHCARE/PRESID

KENNEDY, JOHN NEELY VIA JOHN KENNEDY FOR US SENATE INC
	10/02/2008	2000.00	28020730435

BAKER, CHARLES D. MR.
SWAMPSCOTT, MA 01907

MCCAIN, JOHN S. VIA JOHN MCCAIN 2008 INC.
	05/22/2008	2000.00	28991300300

Total Contributions: 24800.00

26 days

As I write this, we are moving into the 27th day of the Obama Administration. It has not been the best 26 days, this is true...stimulus...Judd Gregg...Susan Collins...renditions... Tom Daschle...Bill Richardson...

Yeah, not that great. Generally a mixture of incomplete vetting and faux "moderates" in the Republican Party. I'm not of the school that is whining for everyone to shut up and "let Obama lead", but I can't get too worked up over these mistakes for two reasons: 1, it's the rookie stuff we all should have expected, and 2, it may be toward a larger end.

First of all, Obama is not a little inexperienced for a president -- he just moved to DC about 4 years ago. He essentially moved out to the campaign trail about 18 months ago, so he's going to make some rookie mistakes, the same way that his understudy Deval Patrick pretty much blew the first few months of his tenure as governor (remember the poorly chosen phone calls, and the lavish Inauguration? Remember Deval praying with anti-homosexual bigots the morning of?) I'm willing to wait for Obama to settle into his new job.

However, one thing that I don't think is a rookie mistake is this continuing outreach to Republicans. Yes, it drives me crazy. But see the whole board, here -- Obama is concretely proving how little interest Republicans have in the success of the federal government in improving the lives on Americans. He can only do this one way -- by putting Republicans in place where they choose between working with him or clearly, undeniably demonstrating their hostility to the very idea of any success for America. Unfortunately, this means that President Obama has to let these Republicans spurn him -- having them refuse to meet, refuse to vote, refuse to negotiate, refuse to compromise, refuse to talk.

After four or five anguishing months of outreach, Obama will have every justification to work solely with Democrats. If President Obama conferences with Republican "thinkers", and gets nothing out of it, if Republicans continue to promise to vote down legislation before they even see it, his case will be made. If they can't hide behind the idea "we were never asked" or "we never had a chance to talk", they're out of excuses.

Then Obama can make his case to America. He can demonstrate on issues X, Y, Z, bills A, B, C, that Republicans had the opportunity to help, to compromise, and simply said no. Hence, Obama had no choice to work solely with Democrats, and furthermore our best chance of accomplishing anything is to add more Democrats -- Senator Hodes (NH) and Senator Murphy (PA) , for instance. Yes, political savants realize this already, but it has to be made starkly obvious.

It's been a frustrating 26 days, but if it provides crystal clear basis for a truly, unashamedly Democratic administration for the next 20 months, the next 44 months, then it's worth it.

What made Gregg go away?

So, Judd Gregg is out. Out of consideration as commerce secretary, because he apparently hadn't realized that President Obama was going to push Democratic ideas. Oddly, though, he has immediately ruled out running for re-election despite a rather healthy campaign balance approaching $900,000. This makes the Secretaryship seem to be a failed attempt at a retirement plan.

I wonder why Gregg is so shy about running for re-election. It seems a bit early to give up, especially with a a campaign account 15 times that of challenger Paul Hodes. It would be an off-year election under a Democratic president, and it certainly doesn't look as if the economy will improve anytime soon. So we can eliminate that Gregg was convinced that he was going to lose -- it's too early to tell, and this race was a toss-up at best right now. We can eliminate that Gregg wanted to get away from the DC game, considering that he was lobbying (intensely, if we can believe Obama's people) to stay in DC. So there's something out there that doesn't add up. Maybe Gregg like being powerful, but doesn't like being answerable to the electorate. Maybe he had some polling that showed him getting killed. Maybe his links to Abramoff are deeper than currently known. Whatever the cause, the Senate will probably be a better place in 2011 because of this decision.

As for the next person to take on the Cursèd Secretaryship, I'd like to suggest that we nominate a Democrat. Crazy, I know. And again, rather than detouring the careers of future Senators such as Kathleen Sebilius, I'd suggest that we use talented Democrats who are not in elected office right now. I've kindly supplied a list of Democrats who lost office from 2008 to 2009, be it by choice or not. Best stuff in bold:

• Nick Lampson: A Texas (read Southern) Democrat who got screwed by Tom DeLay's redistricting putsch. Give this man a job.
• Tom Allen: A Maine Congressman who gave up his seat to try to take out Fauxmoderate Susan Collins, but failed. Give this man a job.
• Albert Wynn (D-MD)...a corporate Democrat, but still a Democrat. It's awfully close to the effect of appointing a Republican.
• Nancy Boyda (D-KS)...a people-powered candidate who won in a red district, but could not keep fighting the nature of her constituents.

In addition to retired yet great Oregon Governor John Kitzhaber, retired Washington Governor (and one-time wave of the future) Gary Locke, and former DNC Chair Howard Dean, there are four more candidates that don't involve crippling the Democratic bench. Have at it.

True Bipartisanship: Reagan's Corpse for HHS Chair

Still smarting off his continuing repudiation by enormously powerful Republicans, we must ask ourselves, is Obama being sufficiently bipartisan? While some bloggers and other know-nothings continually scream for President-by-Grace-of-Republicans Barack Obama to act as if he resoundingly won the 2008 election, that's not the route to go.

Packing his Cabinet with Republicans is not sufficiently bipartisan. Republicans deserve more than three chairs around the table. They deserve more than the evisceration of the stimulus bill to suit GOP codewords...more than simply larding it up with tax cuts and cutting out reproductive health. It is not enough to simply enlargen and deepen George W. Bush's government-religion office. We need true bipartisanship.

With the vacancy in the position of Health and Human Services, this is truly a chance. A few dead-enders are touting remorselessly partisan, if successful, doctor and politician Howard Dean. Wrong -- partisanship is so 20th century. Some visionaries in tune with the country's mood have suggested Mitt Romney. Finer readers of today's zeitgeist offer Newt Gingrich. But these times require true bipartisanship, so I offer this advice:

Appoint Ronald Reagan's Corpse as Secretary of Health and Human Services

There are so many reasons why this is a good idea:

• According to most Republicans, Ronald Reagan was an outstanding president, even better than Abraham Lincoln. A dead Reagan in Cabinet is better than a living Daschle, quid pro quo. We desperately need Republican support for everything Obama will do (apparently), and this really reaches out to those crucial voters.
  
• It would be like having two presidents. Apply some good makeup, find a good suit, and prop Reagan up in the Oval Office with his eyes closed. Aside from the smell, having a motionless, dozing Reagan would make it feel like 1986 all over again!
  
• You need someone who can take the long view. A really long view.
  
• You will not find a more unique understanding of the urgency of health care than somebody for whom medical help right now is just a bit too late.
  

If this true outreach doesn't make Republicans like us, we're out of options. One can only hope that the GOP will quickly confirm Reagan's Body as HHS Secretary, as the last remaining hope would be to appoint Sarah Palin as VP, and have Obama resign.

RNC: Reagan better than Lincoln

The classic Republican response to questions about their endorsement of racist candidates (David Duke, Chip Saltsman, Florida Republicans to start) and policies is that they are the "party of Lincoln". That's right...what happened 150 years ago excuses the last 50 years of the Southern Strategy.

So all six would-be chairs of the RNC were asked to name the greatest Republican president in history during a recent debate. Wanna guess how many said Abraham Lincoln?

Zero.

They all said Ronald Reagan. All six think Reagan was a superior president to Abraham Lincoln.

So in the waning days of George W Bush, we ask a question of these would-be RNC Chairs that we've so often asked about the president -- are these guys malicious, or just incompetent?

The price of ineffective opposition

It's the nature of citizens in a democracy to seek opposition and accountability. Here in Massachusetts, we don't have a whole lot of either. The Republicans have completely blown any chance of being an effective voice against the Democratic Party here, leaving some people desperate to hold our government accountable. Some may have concluded that if you can't get people you don't like out of government, the only alternative left is to make the government disappear.

I'm a loyal Democrat, but I believe that democracy requires accountability. The federal situation is bad enough, where on everything from FISA to Karl Rove, the Democrats have a poor record in seeking that accountability. They talk a decent game, but don't actually do much.

At least Democrats in Washington have a systemic interest in oversight, however. In Massachusetts, there really isn't any accountability for the donkeys in charge. Take the Big Dig, a phenomenally expensive and fatal mistake that occurred on the watch of the former Democratic Attorney General, Democratic Auditor, and Democratic State House. While perhaps not responsible, they were there and they were silent. Hence folks may be suspicious that the Democrats of Massachusetts aren't always looking out for them. Sure, Democrats win, but most Bay Staters aren't registered with that party. Unbroken and increasingly total Democratic control over an uneven state government gives any reasonable citizen suspicions that it's getting a little too cozy in Boston.

And the Republicans, for many reasons, can't exploit this golden opportunity. And the Massachusetts Republican Party is really such a sad joke that they can't capitalize on the Big Dig Boondoggle, the Finneran and Bulgar episodes, the crack-ups of down-ticket Democrats. Since there appears to be little real consequence for the Democrats in the Democratic government of Massachusetts, some folks are attempting to create consequences for the "government" part of Democratic government. That's right, I'm talking about the appeal of the state income tax.

Now, I can't imagine anybody with a working cerebellum would think this is a good idea in its merits. Forty percent of the state's revenue comes from the income tax, so passage of this question would ax the government almost nearly in half. And to believe that 40% of our state government is waste that won't be missed is a simple disconnection with reality.

Given how inept the Republican Party has been in exposing chumminess, corruption, and waste in this state, that role in government is left empty for somebody to fill. While the average voter may not know the names Joe DeNucci and Bill Galvin -- two people who repeatedly receive undeserved free passes -- they know that accountability isn't much of a watchword to most folks on Beacon Hill. And while I firmly believe that 90% of the people in our state government are just doing what they think is best, there is currently nothing in the system to find and throw out the other 10%.

So people vote to "send a message", to "clean everything up" -- by voting to kill the income tax. Heck, for many conservatives who'll be looking at a ballot without real Republican candidates, this will be their only chance to cast a vote at a state level against Democrats. Without Republican candidates for State Senate or State Rep, the only conservative choice on the entire frakkin' ballot is to kill the income tax! Not much room for moderates there.

Had we a political movement in this state that could effectively keep an eye on Democrats, and truly call the Diane Wilkersons and Joe DeNuccis to account for their lassitude and poor judgment, this wouldn't be necessary. However, I think that many, many people feel the only effective way to send a message to the leadership of the Commonwealth will not be by voting for a Republican, but by voting to kill the income tax. If 50% + 1 feel that way, we're screwed.

It's ironic that the surest way for Republicans to achieve on of their goals -- shrinking government and opening up space for the private sector to replace it -- is by being stunningly incompetent. Talking about failing one's way to the finish.

GOP: You are what you wear

Occasionally, Republicans accidentally say what's on their mind, and it helps clarify some of their attitudes.

Apparently there are not one, but two Republicans competing for the right to be creamed by the Democratic US Senate candidate this fall (whether it be Ed O'Reilly, or the guy who's there now). The vicious competition over the 178 or so votes available in the Republican state primary has heated up, with Jeff Beatty attacking his opponent as an "insider". Of course, "insider" is a fightin' term, as it connotes experience and competence, two things which are anathema to much of the Republican party, and a fair plank of the Democratic Party as well. Beatty's opponent is Jim Ogonowski, best known for being the guy who lost to Niki Tsongas for the open Massachusetts seat in Congress. In Mass GOP circles, such a loss qualifies you to lose in higher-profile races in more spectacular fashion.

Anyways, Beatty noted that Ogonowski has gone down to Washington for orders advice, and has gotten money from the Republican head of the Senate. A serious charge indeed, one that will I'm sure be refuted on a relevant, factual basis by Ogonowski. What say you, Jim?

Ogonowski, a Dracut, Mass., hay farmer, shrugged off Beatty's charge in a phone interview with AP on Friday, saying he had been up since 5 o'clock driving a tractor on his family farm to fertilize the fields.

If you could see me right now with my farm boots on -- I'm wearing a snowmobile suit because it's cold on a tractor and I've got a wool hat on," he said. "I don't think anybody could consider me a career politician. That's funny."

In your face, Beatty!! Ogonowski is obviously not an insider, because he wears wool hats! How many Washington insiders do you know that wear snowsuits ever ever in their lifetime? None? Exactly! If Ogonowski were an insider, he'd be wearing a suit at seven in the morning. Or at least he'd lie on a telephone interview about what he's wearing, considering that he could lie without fear of getting caught on this one!

Nobody can overcome the famous Republican argument-by-clothing tack, whether it be George Bush's fake fly-boy suits, or Reagan's brand new cowboy hats. Give it up Jeff...go find your own race to lose.