Being a member of the reality-based community, I admit that sometimes I don’t cotton onto some of the more bizarre currents of what passes for the intellectual life of the country. This time, however, now that I have caught up with it, really just has to leave you shaking your head in wonder.

Take a look at some of these quotes:

“As the father of four children, I am absolutely appalled that taxpayer dollars are being used to spread President Obama’s socialist ideology,”

“I don’t want our schools turned over to some socialist movement.”

‘This is Marxist propaganda.’

And what’s the socialist message Obama is selling?

During this special address, the president will speak directly to the nation’s children and youth about persisting and succeeding in school. The president will challenge students to work hard, set educational goals, and take responsibility for their learning.

But what are the wingers calling it? How about Obama’s ‘Dear Leader’ speech to students

I don’t think this is all about race. Of course, the birther controversy was. There is no chance that the idea would have gotten any traction if his name were O’Hara instead of Obama. Still, it goes beyond Obama’s race, and we know that because we saw it with Clinton, too. We have come to the point where the right wing in America simply denies the legitimacy of any election in which the Democratic candidate wins. When Clinton was elected, Limbaugh started his broadcasts with “America held hostage”, and when Clinton was going to speak at an Army base the wingers speculated about whether he could be protected against the real Americans who did not recognize him as their commander-in-chief. Now, extremists show up at presidential speeches carrying guns and making veiled threats to kill the president.

In short, the American right has decided that constitutional government is not for them, and that they will use any means necessary to ensure that we will have a permanent conservative government.

And they’re the ones who impugn our patriotism?

Another amazing Gallery Walk in Brattle-town! The Brattleboro Brass Band put on a great show on Eliot Street tonight.

Have a great Labor Day Weekend!

This Labor Day, Wake Up Walmart, along with a large coalition of labor, environmental and community groups, are challenging Walmart to live up to their PR promises and join us in supporting the American Values Agenda for Change at Walmart.

To help with the effort, Wake Up Wal-Mart is airing two TV ads in major cities.  Check out the first here and the second below the fold:

The coalition includes: AFL-CIO, Change to Win, Sierra Club, Campaign for America’s Future, National Education Association, American Federation of Teachers, National Consumers League, AFSCME, American Rights at Work, Communications Workers of America, Interfaith Worker Justice, LIUNA, National Labor Coordinating Committee, Service Employees International Union, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, United Auto Workers, United Farmer Workers and United Steel Workers.

The American Values Agenda for Change at Walmart issues a direct challenge to Walmart in five key areas: worker rights, quality jobs, equal opportunity, corporate responsibility and a healthy environment and lays out the next steps for how the coalition, led by the UFCW, will hold Walmart accountable for those challenges.

UPDATE 3 – Tuesday: WCAX, which is as well-connected to the Vermont Republican party as any corporation, reports that “Republican sources have confirmed for WCAX News” that Tom Salmon is joining the Republican party and that he will run for reelection. Statement by Vermont Democratic State Committee below the fold.

(UPDATE 2 – Monday Tuesday (woops): Since its Salmon jump day, I thought I’d bump Julie’s diary from Friday back up top. Totten is less skeptical today, and even has a copy of Salmon’s letter to supporters on the matter (yeah, apparently he still has a couple. Who knew?). Word is that Mr. Auditor’s Democratic re-election consultant team of Burlington Democratic Chair Jake Perkinson and former Peter Welch Staffer Selene Hofer-Shall will be severing ties. — odum)

(UPDATE – Saturday: In terms of professional media picking this up, Hallenbeck echoes what we’ve been hearing, while Totten is skeptical that Tuesday’s announcement will be substantive. – odum)

We’ve got two fairly reliable sources contributing to the following rumors:

1. Salmon will be switching parties on Tuesday, September 8th;


2. Salmon will still be running for auditor unless Dubie chooses not to run for Governor, in which case Salmon will run for governor instead.

We’ve also heard that someone named Lenny Britton (from South Pomfret), who owns a lumberyard in Windsor County, is talking about running for Senate in 2010.

Remember.  You heard it here first.  Or second.  Or whenever.  But, unlike some websites, we’re not going to sit here and pretend after the fact that we knew it was coming but chose not to post about it.

What does any of this mean?  I suspect that in Salmon’s case, it merely suggests that he’s returning to his natural spawning grounds.  For those of you who weren’t paying attention to the auditor’s race in 2006, he basically didn’t bother running much of a campaign at all, and merely squeaked in over a fairly unimpressive and (as I’ve noted before), smarmy opponent.  If he runs as a Republican, I think we’ve got a good chance at beating him just by showing up and actually trying to get someone elected, as opposed to slouching our way into office.

I’d write more, but I think my metaphors are a bit fishy today.  It’s best I clam up now.

Statement by the Vermont Democratic Party regarding Auditor Tom Salmon’s Announcement

We are disappointed by Auditor Tom Salmon’s decision to switch to the Republican Party. Auditor Salmon and his family have a long and storied history with the Democratic Party in this state and have enjoyed a great deal of electoral success with the help and support of the party and our dedicated activists.

As shown during this past budget battle and again in his statement today, it is clear that the Auditor identifies himself with Republican Governor Jim Douglas and the “Party of No-New Ideas.”

We will field an exciting slate of well qualified Democratic candidates for every statewide office in 2010. We are confident they will be successful and continue to do great work on behalf of the people of Vermont.

At the start, the polls showed good support for health care reform. A Democratic House and the Senate; this time it would work differently than the Clinton attempt years ago. With polls showing public support, it could be fixed, right?  Change.

Late yesterday leaders of the Congressional Progressive Caucus wrote to Obama saying

“A health reform bill without a robust public option will not achieve the health reform this country so desperately needs,” the letter continues. “We cannot vote for anything less…..We look forward to meeting with you regarding a robust public option in any final health reform bill and request that that meeting take place as soon as possible,”

Obama needed a reminder even during the campaign about where a big chunk of his support was coming from. An online petition and letter from the Nation Magazine forwarded to Obama urged him to follow up his rhetoric with support of progressive issues. Part of the 2008 letter read

We recognize that compromise is necessary in any democracy…………. But retreating from the stands that have been the signature of your campaign will weaken the movement whose vigorous backing you need in order to win and then deliver the change you have promised.  

First Snowe , then squeeze a caucus.

Maybe it was predicable .Here  from an article in late 2008 about Obama and his Chicago guys. The author a reporter with long Chicago experience who wrote in the Washington Independent said of the Obama Chicago team  By and large, this is a bunch of pragmatic deal makers who view ideology – especially extreme left-wing ideology – as a weakness.  

This seems relevant with news that the White House is still negotiating for a compromise bill with Maine Republican Olympia Snow.  Snowe  is perhaps the last remaining Republican member of what had been the bi-partisan  “Gang of Six “.

A “Gang of One ” ?

Searching out a middle where none exists .

CNN reports that the compromise would not include a public option but leave the door open for a public option provision added at a later date.

The Plum Line blog says ..

should Obama jettison the public option, progressives will come under tremendous pressure to back the plan anyway. White House advisers will likely insist that liberals mustn’t deny the president a historic victory and enable a defeat that could cripple the first African-American presidency.

http://washingtonindependent.c…

http://www.thenation.com/doc/2…

http://theplumline.whorunsgov….

To give a sense of how the greater political world is viewing Jim Douglas’s retirement, Cook’s Political Report just upgraded Vermont’s gubernatorial race from “Likely Republican” to “Toss-Up” status yesterday.

The Democratic Governor’s Association confirmed last week that they will place Vermont among their top-tier targets, along with states like Florida, Hawaii, Minnesota and California (and possibly Rhode Island, Georgia, Nevada and Arizona).

If you're not already a regular reader of Vermont Newsguy, which we've had in our blogroll for some time now,  you should hop over and read today's post on how Verizon Wireless is cozying up to the climate change deniers.

You may have read about it on Facebook, but VNG has the whole story right here, along with some pointed, and very well-founded, criticism of news bias over at WCAX.

 Good work,, Jon!

The writing is on the wall.  All the usual suspects in Franklin County are lining-up to leave the Democratic ticket, whoever it may comprise, high and dry.  Richard Cowperthwait’s  editorial in tonight’s Messenger is a valentine to Jim Douglas, listing all of his supporters among the community of political self-servers that I am ashamed to say make us the Bluest Dog county in the state!  Of course, Frank Cioffi is abundantly quoted, as is the very slippery Mr. Fitzgerald. Not surprisingly, after his puzzling quote in the Free Press last fall that suggested Sarah Palin was qualified to be president, Mayor Marty Manahan called to thank Douglas for “everything (he’s) done for our state,” and the governor returned the compliment by naming him important to the state as a “moderate and centerist.”  You get the picture.

Turning to the question of who is likely to take Douglas’ place at the top of the Republican ticket, Cowperthwait found plenty of local enthusiasm among Cioffi, Manahan and others for Randy Brock.  His views may be odious to the majority of Vermont Democrats; but right here in Blue Dog Central, he apparently is a bit of okay!  The power base of good ol’ boys here loves to close ranks around candidates who are least likely to lift the dust-ruffles and look for the cobwebs of cronyism that cloak every function from permits to public services.  Douglas was just their kind of guy, and they couldn’t find a better successor than Brock.

Former Attorney General Breaks From Cheney, Says Holder is Doing the Right Thing By Asserting His Independence From White House in Getting to the Bottom of CIA ‘Torturegate’ Scandal ‘Based on the Facts’ — But Less Than a Month Ago, He Opposed the Investigation as ‘Having a Chilling Effect’ on Anti-Terrorism Efforts

(Posted 5:00 a.m. EDT Thursday, September 3, 2009)

By SKEETER SANDERS

Former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales caused a sensation both inside and outside the Washington Beltway on Tuesday when he came out in defense of his successor’s decision to reopen an investigation into whether CIA officers tortured terrorist suspects.

In a sharp break from former Vice President Dick Cheney and other conservatives, Gonzales said in a radio interview that Holder was correct to move forward with the investigation, despite President Obama’s often-stated desire to put the “Torturegate” controversy to rest and move on.

“As chief prosecutor of the United States, he [Holder] should make the decision on his own, based on the facts, then inform the White House,” Gonzales said during an appearance Tuesday on “America’s Morning News,” a nationally syndicated radio program produced by The Washington Times, which published an exclusive  story based on the interview on Wednesday.

Gonzales’ comments marked a dramatic reversal from remarks he made in an earlier interview less than a month ago, in which he opposed any such investigation.  The former attorney general told the Associated Press on August 11 that any criminal investigation into whether CIA interrogations of terrorism suspects crossed the line into torture could have a chilling effect on future anti-terror efforts.

Gonzales told the AP that if the Justice Department launched an investigation, it “could discourage” CIA operatives from “engaging in conduct that even comes close” to department guidelines. “So where do you draw the line?” he said. “What is allowed, what’s not allowed?”

GONZALES: HOLDER ACTED PROPERLY IN NAMING SPECIAL PROSECUTOR

In his radio interview, Gonzales said that as attorney general, Holder has a “great deal of discretion” in such matters, but denied having any inside information on whether Holder acted alone in deciding to name a special prosecutor, John Durham, to head the “Torturegate” investigation, then informing the president of his decision.

In sharp contrast to Cheney, who has been highly critical of Holder, Gonzales said he was confident that Holder is concerned only about the “one percent of actors” who went beyond the guidelines of Justice Department lawyers, and not conducting a “witch hunt.”

The other 99 percent “are heroes and and should be treated like heroes for the most part, not criminals,” he said.  Gonzales said Bush administration lawyers clearly defined what interrogation techniques were legal and the few who went beyond the rules should be investigated, despite the so-called “chilling effect” it might have on future intelligence-gathering.

“We worked very hard to establish ground rules and parameters about how to deal with terrorists,” the Times quoted Gonzales as saying. “And if people go beyond that, I think it is legitimate to question and examine that conduct to ensure people are held accountable for their actions, even if it’s action in prosecuting the war on terror.”

REMARKS A DRAMATIC CONTRAST FROM EARLIER CRITICISM OF PROBE

Gonzales’ comments marked a dramatic reversal from remarks the former attorney general made in his earlier interview in Lubbock, Texas with the AP, in which he said that any such investigation “could discourage” CIA operatives from “engaging in conduct that even comes close” to department guidelines.

Gonzales said at the time that he had talked to CIA attorneys who had heard from the spy agency’s operatives. “They’re very, very concerned about the legal liability and legal exposure,” he told the AP. “And that’s the danger with launching some kind of investigation. But, again, this is a decision that’s got to be made by the current attorney general.”

The former attorney general’s radio interview also puts him at odds with Cheney, who bluntly accused Obama on Sunday of setting a “terrible precedent” by launching an “intensely partisan, politicized look back at the prior administration” — remarks that strongly suggested that the former vice president was calling into question Obama’s fitness as commander-in-chief.

Appearing on “Fox News Sunday,”  Cheney minced no words in attacking Holder’s decision to reopen the “Torturegate” probe. “It offends the hell out of me,” he said. “I think it’s a direct slap at the CIA. I don’t think it will work.”

In unusually blunt language, Cheney blasted the president for not overruling Holder. “We had the president of the United States, President Obama, tell us a few months ago there wouldn’t be any investigation like this, that there would not be any look back at CIA personnel who were carrying out the policies of the prior administration,” Cheney said. “Now they get a little heat from the left wing of the Democratic Party, and they’re reversing course on that.”

GONZALES’ TURNABOUT DRAWS MIXED REACTIONS

Gonzales’ latest comments stunned both human-rights activists and Beltway Republicans — and, not surprisingly, drew mixed reactions.

Tom Malinowski, the Washington advocacy director for Human Rights Watch, was quoted by  The Washington Times as saying that “there’s a kind of dumb honesty to Gonzales.”

Malinowski told the newspaper that “There is no reason why he [Gonzales] shouldn’t support this investigation because, at least on the face of it, it appears to validate the Bush-era legal memos concerning interrogations” and added that CIA officials who authorized controversial interrogation techniques, such as waterboarding, “have nothing to fear.”

On the other hand, at least one congressional Republican took issue with Gonzales. Representative Peter King (R-New York), the ranking Republican on the House Committee on Homeland Security and a member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, said he was mystified with the former attorney general’s motives.

“I don’t know the reason for it,” he told the newspaper. “I just think Gonzales is missing the larger point here: This is either a political decision or a liberal philosophical decision by Holder. [This] has all the indicators of a political investigation, a political decision [because] these cases have already been investigated by the Justice Department, have already been examined, to reopen them has to have a chilling effect and violates the spirit of double jeopardy.”

The Justice Department declined to comment on Gonzales’ remarks.

GONZALES’ OWN TENURE AS ATTORNEY GENERAL HIGHLY CONTROVERSIAL

Gonzales, appointed by President George W. Bush  in 2005 as the first Latino to serve as attorney general, is no stranger to controversy. Under his two-year tenure, the Justice Department and the FBI were accused of improperly, and perhaps illegally, using the post-9/11 USA Patriot Act to uncover personal information about U.S. citizens.

His inability to explain his role and influence in the highly controversial dismissal of nine U.S. attorneys — particularly the firing of U.S. Attorney David Iglesias — and his interpretations of the Constitution led several members of Congress from both major parties to call for his resignation. The dismissals are now the subject of a separate criminal investigation ordered by Holder.

When The New York Times revealed in December 2005 that the National Security Agency (NSA) was eavesdropping on U.S. citizens without proper warrants, Gonzales threatened to prosecute journalists for leaking classified government documents, raising the specter of a First Amendment confrontation between the Bush administration and the media reminiscent of the court battle in the 1970s between the Nixon White House and the media over publication of the Pentagon Papers.

But it is the treatment of terrorism suspects after the 9/11 attacks that has generated the most controversy. Gonzales, who previously served as Bush’s White House counsel, drew fire for approving legal opinions written by John Yoo of the Office of Legal Counsel that became known as the “torture memos.” One such memo suggested that Geneva Conventions protections for prisoners of war did not apply to Taliban guerrillas in Afghanistan or al-Qaida suspects held worldwide.

Those memos have led to calls for Gonzales’ disbarment from practicing law and even for the, prosecution of the former attorney general and other Bush administration lawyers.

# # #

Copyright 2009, Skeeter Sanders. All rights reserved.

There’s more to be said about the still-developing situation with Auditor and potential party-switcher Joe Lieberman Tom Salmon, particularly about the mythology that his conflict with the Democratic base that busted their butts to get him into office in the first place is primarily about him being too “moderate” (for one thing, it’s first and foremost about his constant attempts to sabotage his own Party’s legislative leadership – but for another, he’s not exactly “moderate” after all… seriously, where on the liberal-moderate-conservative spectrum does handing over Vermont ski areas to the most unstable and corrupt industry in the nation – casino gambling – fall? Answer: it’s so far off the spectrum, it’s in another dimension).

But that’s for another diary. This one is for entertaining musings. Here’s a scenario for you…

Imagine for a moment that Salmon does become a Republican. Imagine then that he opts not to run for Governor, but to try to play the power of incumbency and runs instead for re-election as Auditor.

Now imagine Dubie runs for the top spot and loses, while the scramble for the open Lieutenant Governor’s office also ends in a Democratic victory. But the incumbent auditor ekes by and retains his position.

And Tom Salmon Jr, as the only remaining GOP statewide officeholder, becomes the functional head of the Vermont Republican Party in 2010.

How does that mess with your head, huh? Am I saying that’s the plan, here? No way, man – I aint sayin’ nuthin. But what makes this scenario so entertaining is that it… could… actually… happen.

Likely? Nah. But still…