Obama to call for the lifting of sanctions on Cuba. It does seem like Obama has been finding some nerve lately. This bodes well for his campaign, and for the whole field of debate.

Following up on Jack's diary about the refusal of the Anti-Defamation League to recognize the Armenian Genocide so as not to enflame political relations between Turkey and Israel – it seems the New England Director of the ADL (rightfully) broke with the National office on the matter – and was promptly fired for doing so. The ADL's defense of itself has been poorly considered, and prominent members of its New England board have already resigned in the face of anger and sadness from many in the Massachusetts Jewish community. Still no national press on this, though – only the Boston Globe seems to be following the story.

Are the Netroots getting impatient with Senator Leahy? This front page diary at dKos is very ho-hum about our senior Senator's most recent deadline for subpoenas information and its apparent two week grace period. Speaking of Leahy, I've put up a poll as to whether or not readers think he deserves credit for Rove's abandoning the ship, as Watercloset suggests. UPDATE: Kagro X registers his frustration as well at dKos.

Is Brian Dubie sucking up to Bill O'Reilly? That's what O'Reilly claims, and the Democrats are all over it. Can't appease a bully that way, Dubes – it only makes 'em get worse.

Belated congratulations to Dem consultant and political usual suspect Matt Levin on his wedding last week. (With his family in town, if you were in the Montpelier area last week and thought you saw Rep. Sander Levin or Sen. Carl Levin of Michigan, you may not have been imagining things).

Rep. Avis Gervais is my rep. She's a very conservative Catholic Democrat in a conservative, Republican-dominated district. The Republicans don't run candidates against her because they wouldn't win if they did.

(I unexpectedly ended up back on Martha's Vineyard this weekend, but I had a chance to get in a quick diary…)

Even casual readers have probably gathered that the Gubernatorial race is stressing me out. The old election calendar in Vermont, which says you can kick it around the first part of the election year and not come out as a candidate until April or May, is a ticket to utter and complete failure for so many reasons. At the top of that list is that, to be taken seriously by the Press Corps who loooooove Jim Douglas, you have to come into the traditional election period already with a big head of steam (read: money, enthusiasm, poll numbers and momentum) which requires an early start (like, NOW) to a serious ground game. But the lack of a candidate has created a vacuum. Shumlin and others have tried to fill the vacuum with Republican Senator Vince Illuzzi. Given that the A-listers on the political bench refuse to consider taking on Douglas, I've been trying to fill the vacuum from completely off the bench with our international superstar, Bill McKibben.

But the other option is to look deeper onto the bench, which could open up more potential names (none of them well known across the state, but that doesn't seem to be an option, frankly. Whoever goes for is going to have to make themselves known to the state before the traditional beginning of the campaign season – next summer – to have a chance). Among those names are Democratic women, who many feel would be a more ideal foil to Jim Douglas's condescending campaign stylings.

Click after the fold for some possible female candidates from deeper on the Dem bench. Feel free to add your own thoughts or candidates in the discussion, and take a minute to fill out the poll of who you think might be a viable candidate…

The first place to look is on the list of Senators, given that they come with a bigger geographic constituency. Those Senators that have to struggle to get in every time are probably not the safest bets. This would leave off Sara Kittell of Franklin County, and unfortunately Susan Bartlett of Lamoille, who is one of the sharpest and most skilled legislators we have. Neither would necessarily deliver their own county to the Dems, however, and would face a strong likelihood of being replaced by an R, so I hesitate to encourage either to consider such a promotion.

Then there are some safe Senators who likely own their seats who don't seem to have the fire in the belly for such a run. Ann Cummings of Washington County seems to fit right where she is. Ginny Lyons of Chittenden also, even though she is one of the most reliable progressive voices. Then there is Hinda Miller, who very likely was on a statewide trajectory until she hit a wall in the form of Bob Kiss and the Burlington mayoral race.

Jane Kitchel of Caledonia County has a solid resume for the position, but hasn't held her seat in the swing county long enough to seem solid – and again, her departure would likely turn the seat back into the red column.

For a few others who haven't held the positions for long, the story might be different. Jeanette White of Windham County holds a seat that would not turn over to GOP hands. White is well liked by the liberal base but doesn't immediately strike one as the sort that is looking beyond her county's borders. Fellow Senators Alice Nitka (D-Windsor) – and particularly Claire Ayer (D-Addison). Nitka is relatively quiet, but served several terms as a state Representative from a swing, gold-town dominated district before moving up to Senator. In that position, she had to stay friendly with a variety of constituencies – including ski resorts, frustrated antiAct 60 types, and the hunter/sportsmen crowd that she is still tight with. Ideologically, that's put her on shaky ground with many issues near and dear to the left, but she has shown unquestionable ability to make cross-ideological friends. Not necessarily a real go-get 'em type, though.

Claire Ayer, on the other hand, is a different story. Ayer was on the edge of a leadership position in the Senate caucus before Campbell and Shumlin worked out their deal, and likely stands to move up if Shumlin faces a mutiny after the next biennium. Ayer is highly charismatic, has been a solid legislator, and gets in front of many issues near and dear to the base. She is also very sharp and well-liked by many and of all the 'B' listers on the bench is one with some of the clearest 'A' list potential. Coming from solidly Democratic performing Addison County, Ayer could make a difficult statewide run without leaving the seat in jeopardy (as Nitka probably could as well).

Moving on from the Senate, the House doesn't yield the obvious options. There are some potential rising stars there, but for the most part, the Representatives seem very much a part of their districts, and in most cases it's hard to imagine them campaigning beyond them, or having any interest in doing so. Even Majority Leader Carolyn Partridge (D-Windham) who is a talented legislator, politically seems very Windham-4. Janet Ancel also has the resume, but it's still a controversial resume after her time at the tax department that she needs to develop more in the legislature. This is not to say that some of them wouldn't be great Governors (I would love to see a Mitzi Johnson administration…), but I'm just not seeing it.

One exception might be Johanna Leddy Donovan of Burlington who has certainly put in the legislative time, has developed the credentials, and as such could deliver Burlington and much of Chittenden County. Sue Minter of Waterbury is another who has all the right stuff as far as smarts and charisma and communication skills and is someone who should be considered a rising star – but likely hasn't put in the time in the electoral world to justify such a jump as truly viable.

Another name from way off the bench who recently popped up in the context of the Vermont Obama fundraiser is Jane Watson Stetson. Stetson has been a Democratic regular for a long time, and is one of the go-to funders for Democratic candidates. Campaign finance laws being what they are (or rather, what they aren't) the wealthy, charismatic and socially active/conscious Stetson could jump start a dark horse campaign with her own money and connections, and if she sold herself correctly to the public could potentially work up a head of steam and interest between now and next summer. Obviously, she hasn't got the experience and comes with no constituency – as opposed to the other names who have a constituency but would have a devil of a time raising the money. The question is, which handicap is more limiting – and that's a tougher question to answer than it may seem at first glance.

So there are a few names to jumpstart the conversation. Any others? Below is a vote-as-many-times-as-you-want poll as to who you might consider a viable candidate for the top post.

 Loading ...

Jose Padilla, center, is escorted to a waiting police vechicle by federal marshals in this Jan. 5, 2006, file photo. He has been on trial in Miami for most of this year, charged with conspiring with al Qaeda to detonate a “dirty bomb” in the United States. Photo by J. Pat Carter, AP

On Thurday August 16 2007 A federal jury convicted Jose Padilla of three counts of conspiracy in a trial that was the culmination of five years of a criminal proceeding that is among the most shameful in the history of the United States justice system.

I am not an apologist for Jose Padilla, I belong to no “Free Jose” organizations nor am I a member of any “Jose Padilla defense funds,” although maybe I should have been, maybe we all should have been because when they throw away the keys to Padilla’s cell we will also throw away any pretense to being a nation of laws, a nation that respects human rights, we will throw away a large measure of what once made us a great and civilized nation.

I am also not a terrorist, nor am I a member of any terrorist organization and that declaration alone, in the modern, mandatory, cocoon of fear within which we are now required to live by governmental decree, is probably enough to have a tap placed on my phone and a couple of guys who look like the Blues Brothers parked in front of my house at odd hours. After all, if I have nothing to hide, why would I bring it up. Under the new Department of Justice rule book I must be indictable for something.

Jose Padilla was arrested over five years ago in May of 2002, picked up in Chicago after returning  from Europe and allegedly carrying over 10 grand in cash. He was held for  about a month as a material witness before Attorney General John Ashcroft delayed a trip to Moscow in order to announce that the US had discovered a plot to explode “dirty bombs” inside the country. Padilla was branded as the “Dirty Bomber” and George Bush declared him to be an illegal enemy combatant.

Padilla was a small time criminal, a US citizen born in Brooklyn, he had lived in Chicago and been a member of a street gang known as the Maniac Latin Disciples. He had been in prison at least once for aggravated assault after a gang member died as a result of fight in which he was involved. While in prison Padilla converted to Islam under the tutelage of someone who is reported to have preached a non violent, mainstream version of the religion. He attended mosques in Florida for years with one of the men who was convicted with him.

Padilla was probably a bad actor, I have seen nothing in his resume that would lead me to hire him as a youth counselor, but was he a terrorist? Who knows? That is the problem.

Had the government arrested him and presented it’s evidence in a court of law, as is done every day, in conspiracies great and small in every city in this country, had Padilla been afforded the guarantees of the constitution of the nation of which he was a citizen, we might have learned the truth.

Now we probably never will, because what the government did was search for shortcuts, the law was inconvenient, due process, criminal procedure, rights of the accused, all that stuff was an impediment to the speedy production of positive results in their war on terror public relations campaign, which followed on the heels of 9/11 and continues unabated to this day.

Padilla was shipped off to a Naval brig in Charleston to spend the next three and one half years in total isolation, held in constant darkness, or constant light, under extremes of temperature, subjected to physical and psychological “enhanced interrogation methods,” the Bush administration’s Orwellian euphemism for torture. And the government got nothing. Nothing.

When all was said and done, after more than three years of criminal treatment, the government, faced with the likelihood that the courts were about to require them to put up or shut up, finally indicted Padilla on the three conspiracy charges of which, last week, he was ultimately convicted.

Padilla was never charged with being a member of al Queada, he was never charged with being a dirty bomber, he was not indicted on nor was he ever charged with any what was alleged at the beginning of this exercise in injustice over three years before.

Our current Attorney General, Alberto Gonzales last week called the conviction of Jose Padilla and his co-conspirators ” a significant victory in our efforts to fight the threat posed by terrorists and their supporters.”

If holding an American citizen or anyone else, for years, years, in military custody, without charging him with a crime, subjecting him to torture during the entire period, and then failing to indict or convict him of anything close to what they originally alleged is “a significant victory” then it helps me to understand their constant claims of significant progress in Iraq or in the “War on Terror.”

Make no mistake, this was no victory. This was a failure of our system of justice deliberately brought about by an executive department and two Attorneys General who had, and have, nothing but, disdain, in fact, utter contempt for the American system of justice and for due process of law.

I’m not bleeding for Jose Padilla here, I doubt if Jose even knows who he is at this point.

By accounts  that I have read he has been driven insane by the circumstances of his confinement. It is reported that as part of the process of breaking him down he was forced to sign documents with the name “John Doe.” One of their goals was to relieve him of his personal identity, they succeeded, all too well.

The government on Thursday convicted “John Doe” of three counts of conspiring to participate in terrorist acts. They can do the same to me, more importantly, they can do the same to you.

They have spared no expense of time, energy and money over the last six years. they have gone to great lengths in establishing shortcuts that enable them to investigate, arrest, imprison and torture any one they want, at any time and for any reason.

To this government, this Cheney/Bush administration, this criminal enterprise that is destroying America one liberty at a time, we are all, each and every one of us “John Doe.”

Bob Higgins

Worldwide Sawdust

Related Story
Window Into a Terror Suspect’s Isolation

An excerpt:

“I don’t want to make it sound like Fair Haven’s completely archaic, but they had to shut down the gay/straight alliance at our high school because there were so many threats,” Holden says.

That happened just before his freshman year. He wanted to revive it, but others were reluctant.

“Even the teacher who was running it got threats. Coming out shouldn’t be as difficult as it is. Gay news on TV and in newspapers is all about the struggle. There are happy sides to being gay. Some people actually get ‘happily ever after’ or as close as you can get. I think there are a lot of people who could use a story like this.”

Even so, Holden’s five-word explanation of “I just like helping people” may not seem reason enough for an introvert to speak out so publicly. And so you ask one more time about his motivation that freshman year.

From
Gay teen says state isn’t always so civil, Rutland Herald, 8/19/2007

Vermont’s got a reputation for being pro-gay; we did Civil Unions back when they were uncool, and we’ve got a reputation for being a lefty state, but it’s really a lot more complicated than that.  There are major lefty elements here, but they intersect with reactionary wingnut elements in strange and bizarre ways.  Don’t get me wrong: I love Vermont, but a lot of nasty homophobic stuff came out during the civil unions meetings and there were some real prejudices unveiled during that time and even for the next couple years later.

Anyway, I posted the above excerpt (and it’s worth reading the whole article) because I think it reflects what a lot of us go through, regardless of when and where we come out.

Back in April, GMD front pager Brattlerouser posted the following:

In a Lost TV exclusive …

Insiders at Al Gore's Alliance for Climate Protection told Lost Nation TV that the former vice president and Oscar winner will announce his candidacy for president sometime between August 18th and 21st.

I called Editor Jack McEnany to confirm and he said, “yes.”

To nobody's surprise, the report wasn't taken seriously, but B'rouser had some compelling connections. And since then, this tidbit from the Taipei Times made the rounds, round-about June 27th (emphasis added):

Former US vice president Al Gore will not be able to make it to Taiwan this September to address the issue of global warming, Democratic Progressive Party Legislator Tien Chiu-chin (???) said yesterday. Tien, who invited Gore to visit Taiwan to promote awareness on global warming, told reporters yesterday that she received an e-mail from the Harry Walker Agency, which has the exclusive right to arrange Gore's speeches, saying that Gore had canceled all his scheduled events in the next six months. The visit to Taiwan had been postponed to next year, she added. Tien said the reason for the cancelation was that Gore was considering a presidential bid.

Curious (see update below). There is some renewed mumbling among the netroots in places such as HuffPo and dKos. It's possible they've all read the reports and have them in the back of their minds. It's also possible there's something in the air they're all picking up on.

In any event, Brattlerouser's time window begins anout 2 hours from now. I know I'm watching (poll after the fold):

 Quick Update first – Al Gore's people denied the Taipei Times bit back at the end of June. I missed that at the time, sorry…

 Loading ...

Join us for a mini DemocracyFest, now with Anthony Pollina! 

Saturday, August 18, hosted by Jessica Falker in Pittsford, VT.

It's like a DemocracyFest event, but on a smaller scale with a less structured schedule. If you haven't been to a DemocracyFest event before, come find out what all the buzz is about! Contributions raised will help fund future Annual DemocracyFests.

Anthony Pollina will speak on Saturday afternoon at 4 PM.

For details: http://democracyfest…

Join us for education, celebration, films, food, on-site camping…and, more!!!

Here's the original vision, from the diary that announced the contest:

GMD will have a contest: make your own internet ad that tells voters why its time to stop voting for Jim Douglas and submit a link in a user diary,  or just via email to me (check my profile). We'll get them all posted and let people vote on their favorite. It could be video, or just straight audio, if you're more into the radio thing.

Now, I have no illusions about the relatively small pool of readers of this site. None of us on the front page are expecting hundreds of entries. So we'll allow plenty of time for the contest. Get your entry in by the first of November, and we can announce the winner exactly one year before election day. That's three whole months, folks. Plenty of time to get creative!

Thing is, I recently received word that one entrant is working on a campaign ad for the contest – but its targeting Lieutenant Governor Brian Dubie, rather than Governor Jim Douglas. So rather than stifle creativity, I'm officially opening it up to any and all statewide races! Of course, at this point, that means an ad focusing on either Douglas or Dubie only – but hey – maybe somebody else will announce their intentions before the November 1st deadline.

The games afoot! Get those creative juices goin!

UPDATE 2: See? See?! I just saw the Times Argus this morning! I’m telling you, its already happening! Arrrrrrrrgggggghhh!!!!!!

UPDATE: Okay, there’s been a promise extracted from me to stop beating up on Illuzzi in regards to a Governor run. Again, I give the guy lots of props for some of his stances, but I think folks were detecting that I was really beating up on those that promote the idea of a run by proxy. But I’ve said my piece and I’ll shut up now…

Given Bill McKibben's enthusiastic comment on this site in regards to a potential Illuzzi for Governor campaign, I feel a new need to nip it in the butt (sorry Bill…).

Here's how I see an Illuzzi campaign playing out. The GOPers stay loyal, as they always do, except for a few in the northeast kingdom. Outside of Caledonia and Orleans Counties, the average voters in the state gets introduced to Illuzzi by news coverage and campaign ads that detail his run-ins with, and casual dismissing of, the law (and as a lawyer, no less – which'll make it worse). They are horrified.

Meanwhile, the Progs absolutely do not let the opportunity pass, as they would never back Illuzzi, and see this as a perfect example for them to prove once and for all that there's no difference between the two major parties. They run somebody – an 'A' lister – quite possibly Pollina himself, who from what I've heard, was an inch away from running for Governor last time. Lefties abandon the Dems in droves rather than back an anti-choice, anti-gay rights Republican with a history of defying legal orders.

Pollina does a bit better than he did against Shumlin. He comes in at about 28%. Douglas's 60% stays solid, as the moderate Dems and Indys that always break for him are afraid to go with Illuzzi because they don't trust him. Illuzzi comes in third in a three way race at 22% and Douglas wins again.

But how would a McKibben for Governor campaign make up the 20% Parker shortfall? Well to quote myself from below…

McKibben offsets about 5% of that 20% with new voters and new interest. He offsets another 5-10% by getting over the name-recognition gap that stymies challengers – especially when they start so late. A McKibben campaign – started early enough – would bring in scads of money that would provide enough resources to get him properly introduced to Vermonters – and the earned media coverage given his celebrity would be far more advantageous than with Racine, Clavelle or Parker. Lefty enthusiasm drives up turnout, which buys you another 2 or 3 points.

Of the remaining 2-7%, you look at persuasion – and Douglas has opened a wide vulnerability on the energy front, on policy (the Dem proposals are money savers for taxpayers and small business) and on character, as an unabashed flip flopper speaking out of both sides of his mouth.

Most of those “moderate” voters are often not so much genuinely politically moderate, as they are politically indifferent. And as such, they vote on character by default – or what they perceive as character. And the flip-flopper narrative is an absolute character-voter-no-no. I believe that can buy you another 5% or more.

Finally, there's the small minority of genuinely intellectual moderates. Many of those voters who see themselves as pragmatic are being swayed by global warming and energy issues, and would rather vote for an intellectual, international leader on the issue than someone who is looking more and more like a global warming denier wrapped in a political opportunist. Their support buys you another 2-3%

See? No problem Bill. We’ve gotcha covered. Jump on in, the water’s fine! Go and check out the draft Bill petition for a little encouragement!

I'm on vacation on Martha's Vineyard this week (in fact, I'm missing a chance to see Howard Dean in Oak Bluffs tonight–fifty bucks is a little steep), so I'm reading the Globe every day, which I never do at home.

Here's a story that doesn't seem to have made the national news yet, but it's troubling nonetheless. The Anti-Defamation League is a national sponsor of a popular anti-bigotry program called No Place for Hate that is designed to challenge anti-Semitism, racism, homophobia, and all forms of bigotry in their communities and schools.

Unfortunately, “all forms of bigotry” apparently don't include the Turkish genocide of Armenians in the last century.

From 1915 to 1923, Ottoman Turks massacred as many as 1.5 million Armenians in what is now modern-day Turkey. Armenians, historians, and some European nations recognized the killings as genocide. The Turkish government has refused to accept the genocide label, and the ADL's national director, Abraham H. Foxman, has also infuriated Armenian-Americans for refusing to call it a genocide.

When asked in a Globe interview last month if he believed what happened to the Armenians was genocide, Foxman replied, “I don't know.” Critics have seized on the remark as suggesting the issue is open to debate, and some have called it genocide denial.

Yup, it's true, and this position puts the ADL at risk of losing some of its credibility and hurting its programs. One town in Massachusetts has already pulled out, and Armenian leaders around Massachusetts and the United States are already moving in the same direction.

Maybe it's time for the ADL to take another look at the issue, and resume its proud position as a leading opponent of bigotry.