Posted by Congressional Aid on September 25, 2008 at 8:13 am · Filed under House legislation, Personalities
Yesterday, Representative Candice S. Miller of Michigan said that she was not inclined to listen to her constituents, who are overwhelmingly in opposition to the $700,000,000,000.00 corporate giveaway emerging in Washington. “I appreciate all of the input that I’m getting from my constituents, but I’m just not reacting to that — I can’t until I understand it better and feel comfortable with my vote. And I’m not sure how I’m going to be voting yet.”
If you live in Candice Miller’s district, you might want to know that.
Posted by Congressional Aid on September 19, 2008 at 4:12 pm · Filed under House campaigns, Personalities
A staffer with the Bob Lord for Congress campaign sent me a communication today suggesting that I might want to write a little something about how that kooky John Shadegg fella pronounces the word nuclear “nookyular”… just like George W. Bush!
I have to admit, it is kind of funny, at least in a juvenile student council race sort of way. But you know, I think I wouldn’t mind so much if John Shadegg said “nookyular” just like George W. Bush, so long as…
… he didn’t support an unnecessary, deadly and costly war in Iraq, just like George W. Bush
… he didn’t oppose a woman’s right to control her own body, just like George W. Bush
… he didn’t support the erection of a massive unwarranted surveillance network, just like George W. Bush
… he didn’t have the annoying tendency of characterizing American military adventures as holy wars, just like George W. Bush
… he didn’t bust the budget with unnecessary military spending on outlandish weapons systems that even the military said it didn’t want, just like George W. Bush
… he didn’t cut benefits for the soldiers he sent overseas to be shot at and bombed, just like George W. Bush
… he didn’t try to argue that global warming is a hoax, ignoring the clear research findings on the subject just like George W. Bush
If John Shadegg hadn’t worked so hard with George W. Bush to send this country barreling in the wrong direction, I wouldn’t really mind how he pronounced the word “nuclear.” Heck, if he had paid enough attention to science, the budget, our veterans, and the actual available intelligence on international affairs, he could add entirely new vowels to our language and I wouldn’t bat an eyelash.
John Shadegg’s pronunciation is forgivable. His policies are a disaster.
Posted by Congressional Aid on September 11, 2008 at 12:25 pm · Filed under House campaigns, campaign gear
Rahm Emanuel, the current occupant of the Illinois 5th District congressional seat, has spent his time in Congress looking out for the interests of corporations and undercutting the constitutional freedoms of citizens. Alan Augustson, mounting a challenge through the Green Party, offers a people-first, pro-freedom, anti-torture platform that a progressive can support with confidence.
If you live in the 5th District of Illinois, show your support for the Augustson campaign with a Free Augustson for Congress Yard Sign.
Wayne County Democrat! Sticker (Bumper)
Posted by Congress Watcher on August 27, 2008 at 4:07 pm · Filed under Power Plays, Senate campaigns
“Remember: In the Senate, 60 is the new 50!”
These words came from Senator Barbara Boxer yesterday at the Democratic National Convention in Denver.
Senator Boxer is a strong progressive, and I respect her work in Congress. However, when it comes to this statement, she just isn’t credible.
Boxer described her ascent to the chair’s position in a Senate committee after the 2006 election brought a Democratic majority in the Senate: “When I took the gavel from the former chairman, I told him that ‘elections have consequences.’ When we win in November, we’ll prove it,” Boxer said.
The thing is that the Democrats have already won in November. The won in November 2006, and they promised that there would be consequences for the Republicans. They promised change and hope and all that. For the most part, they have failed to deliver. The Senate Democrats have caved in to George W. Bush. They’ve given him new unconstitutional, autocratic powers. They’re about to give the big oil companies special favors with expanded drilling, for goodness sakes!
The claim that this time, electing Democrats will bring change, just doesn’t ring true. Until Senate Democrats like Mark Pryor, Mary Landrieu and Max Baucus stop supporting right wing Republican legislation, it won’t make a difference that the Democrats have majority control.
First they asked for 50 seats. Now they say they need 60. What’s next? Will the Senate Democrats need 70 seats in 2010 before they can finally keep their promises?
Posted by Congress Watcher on August 22, 2008 at 3:03 pm · Filed under Personalities
The latest unsubstantiated rumor going around about Barack Obama’s pick for the Democrats’ vice presidential running mate is that Congressman Chet Edwards is on Obama’s short list. Representative Edwards was first suggested weeks ago by Nancy Pelosi, who has a lot of institutional power as Speaker of the House, but is about as popular among Democratic voters these days as a sprig of poison ivy at a dermatologists’ convention.
Personally, I think that mention of Chet Edwards as being on the short list is nothing more than a political maneuver by desperate Texas elites who are struggling with the fact that their oil-powered state is about to become a lot less relevant. It’s also possible that Barack Obama is throwing a bone to Nancy Pelosi just by arranging to have the name of Chet Edwards mentioned.
If Barack Obama actually does choose Chet Edwards as his running mate, it will be proof that Obama is a babbling idiot. As the popular bumper sticker says, Chet Edwards is a Democrat like a catfish is a cat - in name only.
Chet Edwards has voted for just about every terrible idea that has come out of the Bush White House. He’s a right wing extremist who would, anywhere else in the country but Texas, have run for office as a Republican. Even when you count the easy progressive votes, like voting for World Water Day, or voting against cockfighting, Chet Edwards has earned a right wing legislative score as high as his progressive legislative index.
Chet Edwards is pro-war, pro-Bush, anti-environment, anti-Constitution and just plain around anti-progressive. If Barack Obama chooses Chet Edwards to be his running mate, it will be a slap in the face to all the progressive Democrats who worked so hard to get the Democratic nomination for Obama.
Besides the highly objectionable right wing ideology Chet Edwards favors, there’s the problem of his lack of experience. Chet Edwards has represented a fringe congressional district in a fringe state. he doesn’t have any executive experience to balance Obama’s legislative experience. In the House of Representatives, Chet Edwards has never managed to hold anything but obscure leadership positions in minor subcommittees.
Chet Edwards is not ready to be President, and thus, he isn’t ready to be nominated as a vice presidential candidate. Heck, Chet Edwards isn’t even ready to run for the United States Senate.
Only a moron would pick Chet Edwards to be a vice presidential nominee. Please, Senator Obama, don’t be a moron. Don’t pick Chet Edwards as your Vice President.
Posted by Congress Watcher on August 20, 2008 at 8:58 am · Filed under Personalities
Any time now, Democratic voters will receive word about the selection Barack Obama has made about who will be his vice presidential running mate. It’s a rather undemocratic process, the way that the successor to the President is chosen, and it encourages us to be passive, merely receiving the news instead of being involved in it.
Let me give you something to do, then, as we wait for the news of who Obama’s VP will be. Chew on this bit of information about the top contender, Indiana Senator Evan Bayh:
Although Senator Bayh is now being considered for the contest against John McCain, in 2002, Bayh was the primary Democratic political ally of McCain in the effort to defeat peace activists and pass a resolution to allow George W. Bush to rush into war in Iraq.
I’ve placed that news in red text because it ought to serve as an alarm to progressive Democrats that their own political party may be about to be taken over by right wing allies of John McCain.
In 2002, Evan Bayh provided political cover to John McCain and George W. Bush in the sloppy rush to war that ended up costing thousands of American lives and hundreds of billions, growing into the trillions, of dollars. McCain was able to claim bipartisan support for the hurry-up invasion, thanks to Senator Bayh. “I am proud to join Senators Lieberman, Warner and Bayh in laying down our amendment providing the President the necessary authority to defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq,” he said on the floor of the Senate shortly before the vote to approve the invasion of Iraq.
That same day, October 8, 2002, Evan Bayh warned Americans that tens of thousands of midwesterners in a place like Oklahoma City could die of smallpox from Iraqi biological weapons of mass destruction unless George W. Bush was given permission to invade Iraq quickly. Of course, Iraq had no smallpox virus. Iraq had no biological weapons. Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction.
Yet, Evan Bayh was so eager to help John McCain and George W. Bush push America into a new war that he lied. Bayh had no evidence to suggest that Iraq had any plans or any capability to attack the American Midwest with smallpox. Bayh just wanted to make Americans afraid.
Evan Bayh’s scare tactics worked. Thanks to Senator Bayh’s partnership with John McCain, America is now stuck in Iraq.
Now we’re supposed to trust this same politician to campaign against John McCain? Evan Bayh has no place on a Democratic White House ticket. If Barack Obama chooses Bayh as his running mate, it will be a profound insult and betrayal of the progressive, anti-war Democrats who worked to gain the Democratic nomination for Obama in the first place.
If Obama chooses Bayh, hope and change will be the last things we can believe in from the Democrats.
Read the speech by Evan Bayh promoting the rush to invade Iraq - made October 8, 2002.
Alan Augustson 2008 Magnet
Posted by Congress Watcher on August 18, 2008 at 5:31 pm · Filed under Personalities
Expect a surge of outrage among Democratic voters if Barack Obama picks Senator Evan Bayh to be his vice presidential running mate, as many insiders are now predicting will happen. The reason is simple: Evan Bayh has more of a right wing record in the Senate than many Republican politicians.
I’m not just making that up out of thin air. According to the the Progresssive Patriots Right Wing Index for the US Senate, there are five Republican senators who have a less rightist voting record over the year and a half than Evan Bayh.
On the Senate progressive legislative scorecard, Evan Bayh is not ranked as a progressive. Senator Bayh is not in the “moderately progressive” or even in the “only kinda progressive” category. Bayh has earned a ranking in the solidly “not progressive” category”.
Evan Bayh’s right wing legislative score is 50 percent. Evan Bayh’s progressive legislative score is only 19 percent.
If Barack Obama selects Evan Bayh as his Vice President, he might as well select a Republican. The placement of Evan Bayh on the 2008 White House ticket will be a certain sign that Barack Obama has no respect for the progressive Democratics across America who worked to give Obama the Democratic nomination, and will place the Obama campaign’s once-certain victory in even deeper jeopardy than it has entered since Obama started supporting George W. Bush’s agenda of oil drilling, big brother spying, and faith based initiatives.
That’s what has led anti-spying activists to say of Evan Bayh, “The selection of Evan Bayh by Barack Obama as his running mate would reiterate Barack Obama’s turn to the autocratic side of politics.”
Posted by Congressional Aid on August 14, 2008 at 11:11 am · Filed under House campaigns, Personalities
Arizona Republican congressman John Shadegg recently declared that “Congress can be so boring.” Before that, he had a hard time deciding whether he actually wanted to run for re-election to the U.S. Congress.
Well, now he’s having a hard time deciding whether he wants to even talk about the issues before his district. Democrat Bob Lord challenged John Shadegg to a series of substantive debates more than two weeks ago. A campaign insider tells me today that John Shadegg hasn’t bothered to respond. Is John Shadegg having a hard time deciding whether he wants to debate the issues, or is just he having a hard time deciding whether to write his response in the present, past or future tense? Write a letter to John Shadegg at P.O. Box 45444, Phoenix, AZ 85064, and ask him whether he intends to debate his opponent. Be ready to wait a long time for a response.
Posted by Congress Watcher on August 13, 2008 at 6:29 am · Filed under House campaigns, Personalities, campaign gear
What is the matter with Nancy Pelosi? Does she actually want to help the Republicans advance their right wing pro-pollution agenda?
Over the last few weeks, the price of crude oil has been going down - and with no new offshore drilling. The price of gasoline has gone down too, and it’s because Americans have decided that they will conserve energy rather than keep on pumping money into the bank accounts of greedy oil companies.
The only justification Republicans have had for offshore drilling has been that it’s needed to reduce the price of gasoline. Even that is a bogus argument, as the Department of Energy calculates that any new oil from expanded offshore drilling would not even arrive on the market for many, many years from now. The economic impact of expanded drilling through offshore oil rigs would be tiny - only a few pennies off the price of gasoline at the pump.
The environmental impact of offshore drilling is huge, however. Hundreds of oil spills already come from current offshore drilling rigs every decade, and the number of oil spills would be magnified with new drilling. Furthermore, even if oil spills themselves never ever took place, there would still be dangerous pollution of America’s ocean waters, with heavy metals, radioactive materials and even arsenic brought up with subsurface muds. Those poisons would go into America’s seafood, harming humans, not just marine organisms.
Nancy Pelosi once stood against offshore oil drilling, but yesterday she indicated that she will probably support it. Why? Pelosi thinks that she’s making a smart deal, and helping Democrats get elected to Congress.
That’s some mighty dim-witted calculus. As the price of gasoline goes down, the Republicans’ twisted logic for expanded offshore oil drilling becomes increasingly incoherent. At the very least, Nancy Pelosi should seek to delay a vote on offshore drilling. Time is on the side of the opponents of new drilling.
But no, it seems that the Democratic leadership of the House of Representatives is ready to surrender just when the timing is right to put up a fight. Nancy Pelosi is now agreeable to allowing a special session of Congress just in order to help the Republicans rush offshore drilling through, without time for the American public to wake up from its summer vacation and realize what’s going on. Pelosi is offering terrible leadership and betraying the environmental values of her constituents. Cindy Sheehan is looking more and more like a reasonable alternative to Pelosi.
Nancy Pelosi is wimping out. She’s caving in to Big Oil, but that doesn’t mean you have to. If Pelosi won’t lead the Democrats in the House of Representatives to speak for us, then we can speak for ourselves.
Start out with this political button, which declares the truth about politicians who cave in to the demands of oil corporations: Oil drilling is for wimps who are too weak to stand up for what’s right.
Gay Schwarzenegger Sticker (Bumper)
Posted by Congress Watcher on August 8, 2008 at 8:01 am · Filed under House campaigns
Incumbent Congressman David Davis loved getting campaign checks from big oil companies - right up until last night, when he discovered that he had lost the Republicans primary.
David Davis supported offshore drilling, but his Republican challenger ran a campaign criticizing offshore drilling for crude oil. The campaign against offshore drilling won - and among conservative Southern Republican voters.
If I were a Republican in the House of Representatives right now, I would reconsider pushing the idea of offshore drilling. The American people don’t seem to be as gullible as big oil thinks we are.
Consider the issue, and it’s plain to see why. Expanding offshore drilling wouldn’t bring a drop of oil to the marketplace for years and years, and even then, the amount of oil would be so tiny that it could only bring gasoline prices down by a few pennies per gallon.
At the same time, all that offshore oil drilling would release heavy metals like lead, mercury and cadmium into the water, and the risk of oil spills fouling America’s beaches would skyrocket. At the same time, America’s fossil fuel economy would become even more vulnerable to hurricanes than before.
Offshore drilling is a stupid idea. Even a Republican voter can see that.
Next entries »
| | | 
