C&L: Leahy wants to investigate Laura Ingraham!!!!!

(Crossposted from Daily Kos)
UPDATE: I gotta give a hat tip to proudprogressiveca, who tipped me off to the C&L posting as a possible diary subject. He couldn’t do it himself; he’d already used his diary for the day. “…without whom none of this etc.”
Thanks, bud.

As we are all aware, among the Republican voter intimidation/suppression efforts put forth by the Republicans in the 2006 election was right-wing radio spewer Laura Ingraham encouraging her listeners to jam the Democratic voter assistance hotline.

Looks like she pissed off the wrong person.

Laura, were you so confident that we would lose, you were willing to stick your neck out that far?

You just may be about to get Anne Boleyn’d for your trouble.

Below the fold.

I’ll tell you what, Laura: like I said, you done went and pissed off the wrong person. It’s gonna suck to be you.

From Media Matters:

Ingraham encourages listeners to jam phone lines of Democratic voter assistance hotline

As the weblog Firedoglake first noted, during the November 7 edition of her nationally syndicated talk radio show, Laura Ingraham urged listeners to jam the phone lines of 1-888-DEM-VOTE, a voter assistance hotline sponsored by the Democratic Party. Ingraham stated: “I want you to call it and I want you tell us what you get when you call 1-888-DEM-VOTE. They’re on top of all of the shenanigans at the polling stations. One problem: you can’t get through.” Minutes later, while talking with a listener who called the hotline, Ingraham said: “Let’s keep ‘dem’ lines ringing.”

Mistake, Laura:

John Amato at Crooks and Liars is reporting that soon-to-be-Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee is calling for DOJ to investigate Laura Ingraham’s call for her listeners to jam the Democratic voter assistance hotline.

He has the audio, it’s here.

Laura ingraham’s show is carried by the Talk radio Network which is also home to such luminaries as Michael Weiner Savage and Jerry Doyle.

Contact Talk Radio Network, and demand Ingraham’s suspension or termination in light of the potential investigation. Their affiliate relations number is (888) 383-3733. Emails can be sent to affiliates@talkradionetwork.com.

Let’s make an example of Laura and get the airwaves free of this kind of crap, and while were at it, let’s talk about restoring the Fairness Doctrine.

It is time for the end of the reign of the AM hatemongers.

This is MY industry, and I take it very personally.  If a local station carries any TRN programming, call them and insist they drop it.

Attack. Now. End the catapultation of the propaganda.

 

Announcing the 4th Annual DemocracyFest!

Where we started, Where We’re Headed

Back in the year 2004, there was an election – a Presidential election. Leading up to that fateful day there was a primary.  In that Primary was a candidate named Howard Dean, a Doctor who had been Governor of the tiny state of Vermont.

Sure there were other candidates, some of them quite good, but Dean had a message that resonated with many of us who were looking to change the Republican tide that had swept over the country 4 years earlier: You Have the Power.

From those 4 words, a movement was born – a movement that accidentally united average folks with computer geeks, creating the phenomenon we all now call the “netroots.”  The netroots isn’t just bloggers, it’s people committed to democracy using tools that provide tremendous power for networking and information sharing. Tools that were truly in their infancy until some tech-savvy folks decided to attach them to the Dean campaign, morphing those words – You Have the Power – from slogan into reality.

[more after the jump…]

After the campaign was over, people who had experienced the sweet flavor of empowerment were not content to go home and wait a couple of years for the next call to action by one candidate or another. Instead, they kept working, kept learning, kept sharing, kept networking, and kept blogging.

One group decided to have a party, to celebrate all we had learned, and added some training so we could learn more – to become better at politics, organizing, and doing all the things necessary to build the infrastructure that could support candidates at all levels throughout the country. That party was DemocracyFest. The first DemocracyFest was not the last. Due to popular demand there was a second, and a third. From the second came Yearly Kos.

And now, we’re ready for the Fourth Annual DemocracyFest. Once again there will be speakers, trainings, and celebration. There will be the famous Blogger’s Breakfast, there will be candidates, and there will be music.  And there will be US – the netroots coming together with average people, to get even better at what we’ve learned to do.

After the tremendous victories of last week, we need to gear up to take it to the next level.

We know many people here plan to go to Yearly Kos, as do many of us. Luckily, the events complement one another. There is so much to learn and there are so many more people to meet and network with, even if there were 100 events or 1000, we would not cover half the territory between what we know, and what we have yet to learn.

We also know that some people can’t make one event or the other, and we encourage everyone to make it to whichever one you can. There is still too much at stake to rest for long.

Are you ready to join us at the 4th Annual DemocracyFest, taking place at the historic Wayfarer Inn, in Manchester, NH on June 9 and 10, 2007?

When you buy a ticket for the weekend you get:

– 2 Breakfasts (including the one-and-only Blogger’s Breakfast),
– 2 Mid-day snacks,
– 2 Dinners,
– All speakers,
– All panels,
– All entertainment,
– Free parking at the Wayfarer Inn,
– Optional Friday night Meet and Greet

And to top it off, all of this is available for a limited time at a special Election Celebration Discount Rate of $135. This special price expires November 20, so be sure to order today!

While supplies last, early purchasers will also receive a free November 7 commemorative T-shirt.

Are you ready to carry the momentum from last Tuesday’s election forward into the 2008 Primary Season? Then be sure to buy your tickets today.

If you don’t think you can make it, but want to support our training and networking events, become a sponsor! And don’t forget, if you can’t make it to DemocracyFest, please consider YearlyKos.  We need to keep our skills fresh and our enthusiasm strong for the long hard slog into 2008.

If we do keep learning, networking, listening, and celebrating our victories, we can ? no we will ? make the US safe for Democracy once again. With last Tuesday’s election, we made a great stride toward a future in which our children will have a future. That is where we’re going. Let’s keep working together to get there!

And let’s show the nation and the word that, yes, indeed, We Have the Power!

The Lofty Goal of Walking a Fine Line Between Two Political Realities

( – promoted by odum)

(or.. How I learned to Reluctantly Co-exist With Some Democrats)

Ok, time for a post I feel that is long overdue. As most of you know, I live, breathe, eat and shit politics. I’m a nerd about it. And, living in the People’s Republic of Vermont (which I proclaim proudly), I’m subjected to all varieties of left-wing politics, from the rational to the ridiculous. There’s the stereotypical banana-republic-lovin’ types with their Che Guevara posters, the conspiracy theorists (I’m even now hearing how the Democratic victory was some sort of Republican conspiracy), left-leaning Democrats, moderate Democrats, activists of all stripes, pointless let’s protest-everything-that-moves-types, neo-Luddites, back-to-the-landers,you name it, it’s here. And many of these people are my closest friends. And I agree with many of them on many issues, namely that our American system is inherently rigged to benefit moneyed interests, and other than throwing an occasional bone to the masses, it’s always been that way, and that a major change and realignment are necessary for this country to move forward.

The idea that we need to have a better relationship with our planet is one I hold higher than just about anything else. Our government’s priorities have always been screwed up, whether it’s our interventions in the doings of foreign nations or our incessant worship of the stock market and consumerism. Much of middle America makes me want to puke.

I ultimately think that will end up prevailing in the end is some weird synthesis of socialist democracy and capitalism. In principle, I agree with many of the tenets of my anarchist and socialist friends, and wholly support a grass-roots movement to change things. A shift to everything becoming more local-based would benefit all regardless of what side of the political spectrum one resides. I’ve gotten arrested in political protests before, as well as participated in affinity groups that have been a bit on the subversive side. I don’t want corporations to have even one tenth the amount of influence they now do. A glance around my blog attests to whose side I’m on. So I’ve got some semblance of credibility.

But here’s where things differ. I also realize that the current system, even with all of our well-intentioned goals and actions, is not about to come crashing down like the Soviet Union did (well, one could almost say the neo-con implosion was similar, I guess). And so, along with supporting the goals that we on the left strife for, I have made a conscious effort to participate in the system as well as outside of the system. And believe me, I catch hell for it.

A few months ago, Joel Hirschhorn at Smirking Chimp wrote an article called ‘Neo-Cons Meet Neo-Progressives’. It struck a nerve with me:
 

What is now apparent is that we have a whole lot of “neo-progressives,” people who have no hesitancy in supporting mainstream Democrats in the name of defeating Republicans. Neo-progressives cannot resist the temptation to support the lesser-evil as a pragmatic strategy, justified in the name of saving the country from yet more years of Republican dominance.

Ok, I agree with that to an extent. Now here’s where I think he misses the mark:
 

Neo-progressives seem blind to the fundamental deficiencies of the Democratic Party and its candidates. The concept of a two-party duopoly and the reality that Democrats as well as Republicans are beholding to many special economic interests, are also corrupt and dishonest, and when in power do not seriously pursue what were historic progressive and populist values ? all seem now to be lost in the pseudo-ecstasy of anticipating a Democratic victory this year, enough to take over one or both houses of congress. Objective reality is lost in the heat of anti-Republican anger and frustration. Neo-progressives, it seems to me, have let their emotions out-gun their deeper intellectual knowledge and principles. They seem drunk from drinking Democratic Party Kool-aid.

You don’t now how many times I’ve been accused of ‘drinking the Kool-aid’ for the simple crime of pointing out how a Democrat has a good stance on a host of issues, or for dismissing the importance of a party-organizational decision.

Part of the problem with some of us on the left is that we are so disgusted with the political system that we refuse to partake in it in any way, shape, or form. I can’t think of a bigger disenfranchisement. I don’t know how many people I’ve known over the years with great ideas and passion, that haven’t accomplished one single goal. And I’m not saying that all efforts have been completely for naught; we’ve made great strides here in Vermont in the past few years on several fronts, such as gender equality, and restricting GMO’s and bovine-growth hormone. They’re great examples of what good, local politics can accomplish. Over the past few years, nothing has been more important to me than putting the brakes on the neo-con Republican juggernaut. Nothing. It is, without a doubt, the most immediate, dangerous thing I’ve seen in this country in my 35 years of existence. And the biggest short-term solution, as I see it, is the recapture of the U.S. Congress and Senate by the Dems, which is now a reality. I’m not looking forward to the ’08 presidential race. Nobody even comes close to representing my values, least of all, Hillary.

So, I’m stuck in a rock and a hard place. Part of me feels at the very least, like many in the netroots, I should do as much as possible to influence the Democratic party in a way that will help to accomplish our progressive goals. It’s not much, but it’s something, and it’s better than not engaging at all, isn’t it? The idealism I encounter outside of the system is at times refreshing and inspiring, and other times frustrating. I’ve said this before; I hear a lot of where we should be at at point ‘G’, and we’re currently at point ‘A’. What’s step ‘B’ or ‘C’? That, and I think that on the further reaches of our side, I often get the sense that many of us don’t have a clue as to how backwards many parts of this country still are. We carry on like we can’t understand why our beliefs are so marginalized when they just make sense. And that’s one of the things that keeps my idealism in check; last time I looked, there was still a Bible Belt. And Beverly Hills.

I’ll still take every opportunity to ride the ass of every Democrat who dares drift rightward (are you listening, Mr. Welch?). And I’ll still work with my comrades (had to say it) to organize and press hard for our ideas, no matter how out in left field they may seem to some. And I can do it without selling out or being some ‘party hack’ as some called me. But it takes a sense of nuance, knowing that yes, not everyone in the system is completely evil (or those who work with them), but to know ultimately that things need to change, and it’s not going to happen overnight.

crossposted at Five Before Chaos and Daily Kos

Election Analysis: A Mandate for Democracy


Read this on the WWW

The 2006 Election : A Mandate for Democracy

“Our will shall be done.” – The American People

“When the people fear the government, that is tyranny.
When the government fears the people, that is liberty.”
  — Thomas Jefferson


By Steve Moyer

The party’s over.  Republican party dominance, that is.  The mighty Goliath has fallen.
  We can now enjoy a breath of fresh air. Congress is controlled by the
Democratic Party.  We have an opportunity for a new direction.  The ideal is happening now.

The exit polls told us that 42 percent of voters said that corruption was an extremely important issue
in this election, more important than terrorism (40 percent), the economy (39 percent) and the
war in Iraq (37 percent).  WHAT has been corrupted?  Our virtue has been corrupted.
Our honesty, our truthfulness, our peacefulness and our compassion have been corrupted.
These things are
virtues
.

It was the independent voters who made the difference in this election,
a trend which will continue as Americans seek an alternative to the two-party system.
  If you want your vote to matter more then you too should become an independent.

Responsibility and Control

We need to understand the difference between “responsibility” and “control.”  Responsibility
is a virtue we share.  No single individual controlled the outcome of the 2006 election.  But
some of us accepted responsibility for that outcome, either by running for office, voting or simply supporting the truth with
our words and deeds. Whatever you did to help achieve this result, I am grateful to you
for your contribution. Thank you!

We are all richly blessed when we succeed
in removing evil people from positions of power and authority.
Evil is “unnecessary destruction” and the Republicans have done a lot of it the past
six years. Humanity can breathe a little easier now that they have been removed
from dominance in our government.


Election Analysis

The Republican spin-masters tried to make this election about the War on Terror, Iraq or George Bush.
But the truth is that it was a referendum on Republicans and we
rejected them.

In a positive way, Americans voted for Democracy, for an end to
the contempt for the rule of law shown by George Bush and his “rubber-stamp Congress.”
Speaker Nancy Pelosi has interpreted this result as a call for “bi-partisanship” but I think
it would be better stated as a call for “cooperation towards consensus.”

Americans embraced democracy, respect for the rule of law and the system of checks and balances
written into the Constitution. They voted to support a more virtuous Congress, one oriented towards
service to the needs of the people.
The statement which best summarizes this sentiment is:

“Our will SHALL be done.”


My Senate Campaign

It’s all about the truth. We have a right to know the truth.
In light of this understanding, I wish to share some of the details of my Campaign for the U.S. Senate in Vermont

As King Solomon said in the Bible …”all is vanity.”  Still, wisdom exists and
needs to be shared in order to further human progress and the continuing evolution of a more
virtuous society.

There are more reasons to run for public office than to win an election.
As far as I know, I am the only candidate who ran against the entire Republican party
nationwide. I ran as an independent for the open U.S. Senate seat in Vermont left by retiring

Senator James Jeffords (I).

From the

beginning of my campaign

on June 18, 2005, over 16 months ago,  I established the goal to “make the Republican party go away …. forever.”
My initial press release stated:

“I am running against the Republican party and for the cause of

virtue

in society.” said Moyer
today. “America has lost it’s virtue. Our government is like a juvenile delinquent who has been
caught lying, cheating and stealing. Our response has been to give him a credit card, a bottle of
vodka, and the keys to the family car. This government is drunk on power, irresponsible with money,
and dangerous behind the wheel.”

My campaign mantra was “Republicans are evil. Never vote Republican.”  This mantra came to me
by pondering the question: “What WILL work?”  Americans love simplicity. These two short sentences
provided a simple problem/solution diagnosis.  As more and more Republican scandals unfolded during the
campaign, from Duke Cunningham to Tom Delay to Jack Abramoff and Thomas Foley, people started to
resonate with my message.

When I started my campaign many people were despairing with the “perceived reality”
that it was impossible to remove the Republicans. Karl Rove had cast a spell on America
that the Republicans were “unbeatable” and even publicly proclaimed that he was
engineering a

“permanent one-party government.”

Most of the major media had become hapless cheerleadering sycophants for George Bush and the Republican
party line, obediently reciting Karl Rove’s “talking points” without seriously challenging their inane absurdity.
( “They hate freedom.” )
Republican propaganda told us we had a “liberal media” but actually it was a “Republican media”
working to support Republican dominance in American politics.

A liberal media would be focused on ideas such as Bill Moyers’
“A World of Ideas”
PBS series.

Given this political climate my goal seemed quite impractical and unreasonable, even to me.
Still,  I persisted in the faith that it needed to be done to save our nation and chart
a positive course for humanity. I knew that Republicans were evil
because they refused to honor the truth by seeking, speaking and supporting it and because
they had conspired as a group to create an illegal, immoral and irresponsible war for the
purpose of capital conquest.  They needed to be stopped.

Some of my friends were concerned for my welfare during this campaign, but nothing bad ever
happened to me in the physical realm.  The spiritual realm was another matter entirely,
but then how can you harm a spirit?  The “spiritual challenge” of taking down the Republicans
might be the subject of a future book if I can compel myself to recall the unpleasant details
of the experience. Ignorance is bliss.

When I started the campaign I had no job, no money, no car and only a few friends,
some of whom were afraid to be seen with me.  But I persisted anyway, regardless of how
impractical or dangerous my endeavor appeared to others.  I knew the truth.  The Republicans
needed to go down.

During the campaign I produced about a dozen public access TV programs, including some
  with positive proposals such as

“Fresh Peace for the Middle East,”

 
“Hope for Health Care”

  and

“Virtue Democracy.”

The basic problem with American politics is that it is less focused on promoting

virtue

and good ideas and more focused on money, media and moral prejudices (abortion, homosexuality, religion).

Since money is our primary focus in politics it always “wins” ( gains importance ) regardless
of which candidate wins an election.  Of course, this ignores the truth evident in
my campaign, that anyone can make a difference simply by seeking, speaking and
supporting the truth.  Why not free the public air waves so that every candidate can communicate
their message without money?  The focus on “campaign finance reform” diverts our attention
from the central issue of communicating the truth to each other.

One of my first acts was to
break the Republican spell.

Most people lack the intellectual skills to separate truth from propaganda,
to analyze and de-construct propaganda and build effective defenses against it.
The Republicans barraged us with propaganda, some of it quite sophisticated, faster than we could defend ourselves against it.  This was mentally abusive to all of us.
A professor friend offered a good term for this phenomenon: scurrilous manipulation.

For example, if you believe that the “war on terror” is necessary, then you have fallen under the spell.
You cannot have a war on a tactic and in truth war IS terror.  Waging war on terror creates more terror,
as we now clearly see in Iraq. Jesus said, “Judge by the fruits.”  The solutions are political, social and spiritual.

Consider the following “spell breaker” question:  What is the opposite of “a war on terror?”
How about “a quest for justice?”  A war on terror only creates more terror whereas a
quest for justice will create more justice.  Whatever you focus upon expands, first in your mind
and then in the outer world. The war is in our mind..

Every candidate must communicate their message to the people. I used

public access TV

,

FM community radio,

  and the
 
  Internet.
  Since I was running a national campaign in opposition to the entire Republican party and
supporting virtue in politics, I used the Internet extensively through direct email to politicians, journalists, Bloggers, activists
and political

mailing lists.

  There were many days when I sent out over a thousand individually-addressed emails which
  likely reached at least a few thousand people.

All of this communication work took a lot of time and energy but required very
little money.  I found a perfectly good fax machine in a trash dumpster and purchased
Vonage for free unlimited long distance.
I operated out of my home in the Green Mountains of Vermont. My back yard is a mountain.  Sweet!

A few days before the election I realized Harold Ford had been “Roved” by the racist

“Call me, Harold”

TV ad.
I knew that Tennessee had a racial prejudice problem and understood that Ford was finished.
Republicans are evil. Never vote Republican.  ( See how well that works? ) I had faith that Virginia
would do the right thing in the end. My faith in Virginians was well-founded even though I confess it was a nail-biter conclusion
to the election.  Thanks, George Allen.  You showed some honor in the end.

I decided to target the “Show Me” state, Missouri’s Senate race which was
a neck-in-neck tie.  I whipped my fax and email machinery into high gear
by sending content from  my
Reasons to Reject Republicans

database which I created two weeks prior to the election as my own
“October surprise.”  Judging by the results, I picked the right issue
and the right tactic at the right time.  In any case, I got the right words:  “Reject Republicans.”


I felt especially good when Missouri Democratic candidate Claire McCaskill won with a
two-point margin. Perhaps when Missourians were shown the precise
Reasons to Reject
Republicans
that it helped settle their minds.  In any case, I am pleased with the result.
  Thank you, Missouri!


Advice and counsel

My advice to the Democrats is to serve the people. Listen to them!  The Republicans stole
our democracy.  The Democrats need to return it.  Democracy is in their name.
Now they need to do it.

My advice to all Americans is to become independents, like

Senator James Jeffords (I)

did in 2001 and millions of Americans did in this election. My advice to Republicans is
to “go and sin no more.”  If they want to survive at all they need to revive their
traditional core principles of individual rights, limited government, non-intervention in world affairs
and fiscal conservatism. They were the party which supported a “balanced budget amendment” and “term limits”
in Newt Gingrich’s

Contract with America.

Republicans must stop dividing Americans by our social and religious prejudices for
the purpose of unfair political advantage.  That’s evil.  They need to honor the truth
by seeking, speaking and supporting it. They need to remember how they had sufficient
virtue to move for the impeachment of President Nixon.

Money and War

There are many reasons for the war in Iraq and the “war on terror.” The simplest reason
is the “love of money.”  The advocates of the war secretly referred to Iraq as “the prize.”
The prize is a lot of money for us.  That was the plan, anyway.
But like an addicted gambler who keeps believing that the payoff is coming soon, we
keep spending money in the hope that it will soon bring us “the prize.”

Anyone who wishes to achieve a deeper understanding of the conflict in Iraq and its
relation to money should watch two Google videos:

The History of Oil

and

Money Masters.

Our next national discussion shall be how the money system creates war by its nature.
Money is a terrible way to run our world.  We shall see
how money creates terrorism and war by its very nature. We should love people and
use money but instead we have come to love money and use people.

Money needs competition, another system for meeting human needs.  As long as three
people want to play the money game it shall exist.  But the rest of us can free
ourselves from it by getting government to create an honorable alternative to taxes.
Consider the question: What would government be about if it wasn’t about money?
It would be about forming consensus on what needs to be done.

When George Bush says that the we are in Iraq for “freedom and democracy” he is
really saying that we are there to support “money and capitalism.”
Freedom translates into money and democracy translates into “capitalism.”
The oil of Iraq is being stolen through capital contracts with US/UK corporations.
It’s legal since Iraq has a “democratic” government but it’s still evil.
Law is flawed.  Everyone knows that the Iraqi government is being propped up by our military.

The ideological conflict between Islam and the west is centered around the idea of “supreme authority.”
For Muslims this is Allah; for us it is money.  Allay versus money.  That’s the ideological
conflict put in the simplest terms possible.  Stated in philosophical terms, the conflict is
“quality versus quantity.”  Money is always about numbers … quantity … and Allah is always
about righteousness … quality.  Do you understand how they can perceive us as “The Great Satan?”
The irony is that they are fighting for freedom … freedom from the rule of money …
even if they don’t recognize it themselves.  They are fighting for the rule of righteousness.

One definition of tyranny is “no other choice” and whether you get your money from
the private sector or the government it is still the same thing : a tyranny of the soul.

Money wants all power for itself.  Money is an anti-democratic force in human affairs.
It creates conflict, revolution and war by its nature.  The idea that “money matters most” is the
idea which must be constantly challenged. Where are the true Christians nowadays?
  Rise up and make your presence known!

This is an issue for bipartisan consensus because both parties have been serving the
interests of money. Ralph Nader’s slogan “Both parties work for the same corporate paymasters”
expresses this loyalty to the “rule of money.”

Money is an evil system of domination and control for the benefit of the few at
the expense of the many.  Our steadfast refusal to discuss this issue and seek better alternatives is central to our dilemma.
Truthfully, “It’s all us. We are the problem. We are the solution.”  We need to change
our mind and our behavior.

Freedom requires

virtue
.
Democracy requires virtue. Civilization requires virtue.
Thomas Jefferson said: “Without virtue, happiness cannot be.”

Democracy requires an informed electorate ( correct information flow )  and history will show
how our mass media has been corrupted by the “love of money.” We should all be searching for “better ideas”
rather than “more money.”  People come first. Profits come second. 
Advertising has stolen our soul and sold us into economic slavery to money.
The best messages are used to promote the worst ideas.

Leadership generally comes from the fringe rather than the center.  The idea that Democrats
are going to govern in a bi-partisan “centrist” manner tells me that we are in danger of
receiving more tired excuses for failed ideas.  We need new ideas and new leadership.
Many people are trying to get our attention and contribute new ideas.  Are we listening?
We need a system for raising public awareness of good ideas.  Both parties have failed America
in this regard.

Terrorism is often a response to perceived injustice, whether real or imaginary.
The solution is a “quest for justice” rather that “competition for dominance.”
The dominant paradigm is dominance itself.  We need a new paradigm, one focused on
virtue rather than vengeance, faith rather than fear and consensus rather than control.

Our quest to dominate the oil of the Middle East is wrong.  It’s presumption is that we have
the right to dominate others because we have the most money and the strongest military.
That’s evil!

The path to justice is paved with the truth.
We need those investigations. Impeachment is a

patriotic duty

rather than a nuisance to be avoided. We must respect the rule of law in the following order:

1. Investigate.
2. Impeach.
3. Imprison.

Resolve to end political domination and economic hegemony by working for consensual solutions
to solve global problems such as poverty, oppression and terrorism.

We need to realize how terrorism
has been created with

false flag operations

to make it appear as if someone else is responsible.

Millions of Americans believe that  9/11 was a false flag operation conducted by elements of the
U.S. government to provide a justification for the invasion and occupation of Iraq (the prize).
The Republican Congress failed to honestly investigate 9/11, the biggest crime in American history.

If the Democrats are wise they will recognize that they can best “fight terror” by going after
the terrorists in our own government and changing U.S. foreign policy so that it stops terrorizing
the world. Investigations are necessary. Open hearings are necessary. Justice requires it.

Nancy Pelosi said after the election: “Democrats will lead the most honest, most open and
most ethical Congress in history.”  Let’s hold her accountable. Honest
government requires honest investigations.


Virtue Politics

I have repeatedly said that I want an END to the Republican party because Republicans
have lost their virtue.  Once they are gone, we should turn our attention to the
Democratic party and insist on a better democracy, one more representative of the people.

The two-party system is a “money conspiracy” which prevents truly virtuous leadership. I propose that we take down the two-party system by taking down one of
the two parties first, the Republican party.

The second step in my
Three Step plan for Democracy
is to get rid of the
Democratic Leadership Council (DLC)
which promotes corporate politics in Democratic drag.  We won’t need the
DLC once we start listening to the people.


The third step is to create a new political system on the Internet which gives the people
an opportunity to participate in the governance process more directly.

Parties are corrupt organizations by their nature.  Lobbyists
are corrupt by their nature.  Corporations are corrupt by their nature.
Money is corrupt by its nature because it says that control is more important than consensus.
We’ve turned our power over to corrupt institutions and a corrupt economic system.
We need a new economy but our political system is married to the existing one.

Therefore, we need a new political system first.

Parties keep the truth from being known and the people from hearing alternatives
to a two-party system.  Which party is the peace party?  Which party believes that the official
story of 9/11 is false?  Millions of Americans are in favor of a peace-oriented foreign
policy, oppose the death penalty and believe that our government was involved
in making 9/11 happen.  Which party represents these people?


The Independent Revolution

We’re fed up with both parties.  The majority of Americans consider themselves independents.
As I was gathering signatures on my ballot petitions I was often asked “What party are you?”
When I said “independent” that was usually all the information needed: “Give me the pen.”

Some people accused me of “demonizing” Republicans.  I always disagreed.  I simply
told the truth and made correct judgments.  Politics is all about judgment.  In politics we often
must choose “the lesser of two evils.”  I said that Republicans were evil because
they “dishonored the truth.”  I repeatedly said that they could “shut me up” by seeking, speaking
and supporting the truth.

When we honor the truth we speak it to the best of our ability.  When we “spin”
the truth, or only tell part of the truth so as to create a false impression,
we dishonor the truth.  That’s evil.  It is unnecessarily destructive of true understanding.

Many people associate “evil” with “hatred” but nothing could be further from the truth.
Evil is a judgment.  Hatred is an emotion.  We should love those who do evil
by telling the truth and asking them to “stop doing evil.”  It is the truth which
sets us free. Treat others the way you would wish to be treated if you were them.

If you are a public person, such as a politician or pundit, you must tell the truth in the
public realm.  If you are a private citizen, you may tell it in private.  In either
case, hearing the truth will strengthen our collective conscience.  Jerry Brown said “Speak truth to power.”
Howard Dean said “You are the power.”  Amen!

I ask all Republicans to “stop doing evil” and leave their party.  Good people do not
stand in unity with evil. The Republican party has been taken over by an evil spirit.
Is there even one Republican politician who has acknowledged the evil of their actions?

The greatest evil
we do is to deny the evil we do.
Republicans continue to act as if they have “done no wrong.”  They claim things have gone
wrong in Iraq but they don’t acknowledge how they conspired to create an aggressive war for
private profit.

I have identified 46 categories of Republican evils in my

Reasons to Reject Republicans

database and search engine.  I learned that many Republicans respond well to righteous judgment
even though it may hurt them emotionally.  It’s almost as if they need judgment to be whole.

Some of my earliest supporters were Republicans.  I still have Republican friends
and associates.  I bear no ill will towards them but I let them know what I think.
I even joke about “evil Republicans” if I think it is a tactful way to make my point.

Virtue is moral philosophy, not religion. It is the distilled wisdom of humanity.
It is “what works” in human affairs.  We teach business but we don’t teach virtue.
Why is that?  Because we worship money. Virtue is left to the religious realm but
many religious institutions have been corrupted by money.  Where are the Christians
when we need them?  Quietly living in fear of losing their tax exemption.

Many Christian evangelists essentially preach the gospel of money and power.  That’s
how Republicans rose to dominance. Christians loved money and the power of government more than righteousness.
One of the results of the election is that Christians are re-evaluating
their faith to re-align themselves with truth and righteousness.  It’s important to
be able to separate religious “stories” from truth and righteousness.

Seeking political power for the purpose of domination is not righteous.  It’s self-righteous.
There is a lot of false Christianity nowadays and moral hypocrisy in the ranks of the Republicans.
You can tell these people by their aspiration to gain power OVER others.  That’s evil.
Service is a virtue.  Domination is not.

The Pundits Spin

“If Democrats look at this as a mandate, they’re crazy!” proclaimed famous political analyst Charlie Cook.
He almost went catatonic as he furiously insisted “Nobody voted for Democrats. They voted against Republicans.”
That’s false, but it shows Charlie’s true political persuasion as a Republican.

Bush only changes course when it is absolutely essential to maintain power.  Hence, we have
crisis government with one crisis after another so that this weak leader can justify taking action.
It’s time to focus on President Bush and start beating those impeachment drums.
The push for impeachment is a worthy endeavor in itself because it produces a crisis.
Remember, Bush needs a crisis to justify action.

When someone says that the Republicans are corrupt, what is it precisely that has been corrupted?
It is their virtue. Honesty is a virtue. Respect is a virtue. Service is a virtue. Honor is a virtue.
Truthfulness is a virtue.  The Republicans have been dishonest, disrespectful, and have failed
to honor their oath to the Constitution and to serve the American people by speaking the truth.

Pelosi’s commitment to resist impeachment is wrongheaded and should be reconsidered.
How can you have an ethical Congress with an evil administration?
The fish rots from the head down. The government must be ethical in all of its branches
and operations.  I refer Speaker Pelosi to my essay entitled

“Impeachment is a patriotic duty.”


The Future

Politics should be fun.  The Republicans took the fun out of it.  They made it into
a high-stakes, high finance mind game.  That’s not fun.  That hurts! Enough already!

I have a vision for a system on the Internet which will give the people a clearer voice in government.
I call it “consensus software” or “Internet Democracy.”  There is so much focus on competition
that we have neglected an entire class of software which can be used to form consensus.
I am seeking a Senator or Representative who is willing to dedicate a small portion of his/her
staff budget to the development of this open source software for their web site.  Then everyone
can have it all over the world.

We need a system to discern quality ideas and elevate them in the public consciousness.
Advertising doesn’t work. The ideas are out there, but there is too little money to bring them to our
attention.  We need a new political system, one which is based on quality discernment of good ideas.

Parties are corrupt organizations by their nature.  Lobbyists
are corrupt by their nature.  Corporations are corrupt by their nature.
We’ve turned our power over to corrupt institutions and a corrupt economic system.
We need a new economy but the political system is married to the existing one.
So we need a new political system first.

What I want

Assertiveness is a virtue. I accepted responsibility for removing Republicans from
power and took appropriate steps to “make it so.”  I took responsibility and asserted the truth.
I am pleased with the result.

Honesty is a virtue.  I gave Vermont’s Senate seat to Bernie Sanders without a fight
so that I could save this nation from the fascism and war the Republicans were
creating for America. Towards the end of my campaign I actually told Vermonters:  “Vote for Bernie and
listen to Steve.”

Truthfulness is a virtue.  If I had

seriously challenged

Bernie Sanders I might have divided Bernie’s support sufficiently to give
Vermont’s Senate seat to the Republican, preventing Democratic control of
the Senate.

I want a job constructing an open data, open source Internet democracy
system where any citizen can create and endorse proposals.  Let’s create software
which facilitates the formation and discernment of consensus on every issue.
I want “consensus software” and I have a plan for it which has already begun
with the Vermont Democracy Network.

Scientific polls only ask the questions pollsters want to ask and we never know “who says what.”
They are biased towards conservative ideas by their nature, since we can only
be polled on well known ideas.

We need to empower citizens to create and endorse proposals in the open so we can network
with each other in support of good ideas. This requires a standardized system.  It is the
rightful responsibility of government to create the standards and the system, without any
consideration of profit or private sector competition.  In a way, it is the opposite of
the lobbying system we have now, which is an extension of the advertising idea.  Lobbyists
are basically salesmen advertising ideas to our legislators.  I view this endeavor as
“building the democratic infrastructure of the 21st Century.”  It may become an answer
to terrorism and oppression worldwide.  Even dictators can allow such a system to exist
without feeling threatened.

Independent politicians generally fail to receive partisan patronage.
I want a good job designing the software which I believe will free us from
this dysfunctional two-party system. I want a quality discernment system on
the Internet for good ideas and good leadership, a system we can give to the world as a tool
for creating better democracy, justice and an end to this abominable war on terror.

The President wants “fresh ideas” for how to solve the situation in Iraq.
I’ve already provided some in my Fresh Peace for the Middle East
proposal, but who’s listening?  I’ll provide more ideas soon but we need to have a system
where the people can endorse specific solutions on the Internet so that the politicians
will actually address those ideas which the people favor. We can do better than
“scientific” polls. We can support an open public discourse using standards which empower us
find good ideas and quality leadership.

Recognize your true leaders.  Honor them.  It’s the right thing to do.

We need process governance rather than party governance and we need to gradually
involve the American people in the process of governance.  The people are better able
to form consensus than  politicians because the people are more detached from
party power structures and the corrupting influence of money in politics.

It’s good to be right.  What was my effect in this election?  It’s difficult to say
with certainty but I know in my heart that it was significant.  If my actions had some
significant affect on the election then I deserve a good job doing something
which honors my talents.  May I have such a job, please?

I ran on “teaching virtue” and “rejecting Republicans” because they have “lost their virtue.”
The most important issue according to the exit polls was “corruption.”  What gets corrupted?
Virtue gets corrupted.  Republicans have failed to teach us virtue, much less practice it.
Republicans have taught the love of money and the lust for power through deceit, division and
domination.

We are too powerful to be  playing these silly mind games.
We must accelerate our spiritual, social and political evolution in harmony with virtue.
Technology is pushing us into the future regardless of our acceptance.  The wise course
is to adapt to the increased pace of societal change.

We need meta-evolutionary technology, tools which will help us develop techniques to
evolve human society faster, with greater wisdom and more virtue.

Most politicians talk about government programs; I talk about government standards.
Standards can empower us to “do more with less.” We can help ourselves and
reduce our dependence on government with standards.  Health care is an area
where standards could yield an immense benefit.  Imagine if there was a standard for
evaluating drugs, treatments, remedies, doctors and the entire realm of health care.

Imagine if you could endorse a natural medicine remedy or alternative medicine practitioner
in the open without fear of being sued or punished and that you could do it using a “standard identity”
so we could find those individuals who consistently show good judgment in a given area.  Share the wisdom!

This doesn’t require centralization if we have standards.  The data can exist on
10,000 different computers on the Internet and be shared dynamically using programs
called agents to collect and process the data into meaningful information and advice.
This requires standards for data and “correct information flow.”

The “more with less” paradigm decreases the size, scope and control of government while
increasing the freedom and quality of life for the people.  In order to accomplish it we need
to focus on three things;  virtue, communication and standards.

Such a system could prevent the nation from entering into unwise military actions or at
least leave a clear record of who opposed it for future reference. We need to know
who gets it right and who gets it wrong.

Politics is all about good judgment.  Who has good judgment?  If we only have TV ads
to answer this question we are depending on money to tell us how to vote.  We need to
accept responsibility and tell the truth to each other in an open system on the Internet.


Conclusions

It’s all about the truth.  Justice requires the truth.  We rejected
Republicans because they dishonored the truth, misleading Americans into believing that
reality is a perception and that truth is irrelevant..

Responsibility is a virtue we share.  Control is a deceptive illusion.  Democracy requires
the truth. Idealism is a virtue. Seriousness is a spiritual illness.  Put all of this
together and you can get the “cosmic giggle.”

I lost my campaign for the Senate. America re-claimed its democracy.  I’m responsible.

The virtue of Congress has been corrupted by the love of money.
We need a new political system. An increasing number of Americans are moving away from
the two-party system because it has failed to represent them.
The political parties are more interested in attaining and preserving their own power
than in creating a truly democratic republic.
This problem requires an “out-of-the-box” solution.

The quality of communication between constituents and their representatives must be improved.
Political networks are the future.  They can empower us to focus on finding good ideas.
We need to create a better democratic infrastructure for the 21st century, one that utilizes the Internet to
increase citizen participation in the governance process.

Citizens must come to feel that they can influence policy in a more direct manner
rather than only through campaign contributions to their representatives.  Citizens need to be given the opportunity to work directly on the
legislative process, forming coalitions and consensus around specific ideas and proposals.

We need a system which will help us guide our elected leaders to govern wisely, to make intelligent
choices based on quality information.  This will solve the problem of partisanship in government.

The impact of the Internet on our consciousness is vastly under-rated in my
opinion. Let’s use it intelligently to unify around good ideas and quality leadership,
expanding democracy to include all of us.

  “Enlighten the people generally, and tyranny and oppressions of body and mind

will vanish like evil spirits at the dawn of day,” — Thomas Jefferson


Steve Moyer,  RR 1 Box 60, Warren, VT 05674
802-583-2163 (h)  802-882-1969 (o)

Carville Cranks His Self-Destructive Impulse Up to 11

James Carville either has a book coming out, is just terrified at his rapid slide into irrelevence, or some sort of cognition-impairing brain disease. I’m sure everyone remembers last week when Carville famously blamed DNC Chair Howard Dean and his 50-state strategy for the Democratic disaster that was last week’s election (hey, check it out if you don’t believe me). The roars from the netroots and the State Parties in response were extraordinary, ironically followed by numerous other blog-posters across the country urging bloggers to turn down the rhetoric responding to attacks (verifiable and inferred) against Carville, Rep Rahm Emanuel (head of the DCCC) and Sen. Chuck Schumer (head of the DSCC).

Despite their reputation, bloggers are nothing if not dutiful. Even in light of blog responses that Carville “drew first blood,” all the positive feelings around the election quickly brought down the heat.

But for whatever reason, Carville wants the heat back on and cranked way, way up. From yesterdays New York Times:

two leading party strategists rebuked Mr. Dean on Wednesday, saying the Democrats could have captured 40 House seats rather than 29 had Mr. Dean bowed to demands by Representative Rahm Emanuel of Illinois, leader of the effort to recapture the House, to put more money into Congressional races.

“I would describe his leadership as Rumsfeldian in its incompetence,” one strategist, James Carville, said of Mr. Dean.

Mr. Carville, whose close ties to former President Bill Clinton and Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York have prompted speculation that he is attacking Mr. Dean on their behalf, said the Democratic National Committee had taken out a $10 million line of credit and used barely half of it.

“They left money on the table,” he said.

Asked whether Mr. Dean should step down, he responded, loudly, in the affirmative. “He should be held accountable,” Mr. Carville said.

It’s clear that, for whatever reason, Carville wants a war with Dean, the blogs and the State Parties. I don’t think we want it – near as I can tell, everyone would rather focus on the upcoming session and the next election – but Carville seems intent on foisting one upon us. Nor does Sen. Schumer want it, as he was lightning-quick hopping onto Daily Kos, thanking bloggers for their help, praising the 50 state strategy, and actually engaging with posters.

Smart man. Carville’s relevance will be stomped out in precious little time, and I don’t think anyone who wants to keep their reputation should be standing too close…

Douglas and Symington Share a Hot Seat

[originally printed in the Vermont Journal]

What a difference a week makes.

After last week’s midterm elections, we all woke up last week in a different nation, a different world – but seemingly not a different state. We still have the same Republican Governor, the same Republican Lieutenant Governor, and are still looking at an overwhelmingly Democratic state House and Senate. Same old, same old, yes?

Well, not quite.

With the virtual abandonment by State GOP Chair Jim Barnett of local Republican candidates to their own devices (a decision Barnett may now be paying a political price for), Democrats picked up even more state House and Senate seats. The result? A non-Republican critical mass that is mathematically capable of overturning a Douglas veto. In other words, depending on Speaker Symington’s skill at cat herding, the combined Democrats, Progressives and Independents in the state house could potentially shove Douglas right out of the Captain’s seat on the ship of state.

What this means for policy is an open question. There will certainly be renewed pressure to follow up the Catamount health plan with further reform, given that the Democratic rhetoric has always cast it as merely a first step. But whatever is on the horizon, one thing is certain: Speaker Symington and Governor Douglas are both going to be on the hot seat like never before.

In fact, it’s hard to say which one is in a less enviable position. Obviously Douglas’s future veto threats will be less-than-absolute bargaining chips, and on virtually every matter to come before lawmakers this biennium, he will be forced to compromise more than he is accustomed to. Political power is largely defined by perception, and Douglas cannot afford a single overridden veto, lest the perception of his power should start snowballing down into the ditch. As always, Douglas will stake out his own positions in simple sound bites and take them directly to the public, but after last week’s electoral losses for House Republicans, the Dems may not be as willing to listen, and the Governor may find himself making his appeals to an echo chamber made up entirely of his own base.

But if you think that sounds challenging, consider the pressure Symington will now be under. The Speaker is now the sole conductor of an orchestra with unlimited potential, and everyone – everyone – knows it. All eyes are watching, scrutinizing and Monday-morning quarterbacking her every move, whisper and feint. But what’s the reality? Getting that lot to unanimously agree to anything at all will be a challenge, and given the realities of social and political inertia, the more progressive or dramatic the policy proposal is, the more remote the possibility of any leader being able to hold an absolute consensus throughout a full-scale political collision. Despite this, enthusiastic activists feeling surges of power and inspiration at the phrase “veto-proof majority” won’t give her much breathing space at all not to deliver – in fact, one could argue that it’s not their job to.

So Douglas and Symington will be a couple of shaky political opponents, each trying to bluff the other. Douglas is the more practiced at political chicken, but each high-profile conflict he wins will draw the non-Republican majority a little tighter for the next head-to-head, as nature inches towards its balance.

The big winner in all this could well be the third high-profile player in the Montpelier mix – newly re-elected Senate President Pro-Tem Peter Shumlin. Shumlin – one of many players making a triumphant return from the political shelf this year – will have a far easier time setting the Senate calendar and maintaining caucus cohesion than his House counterpart. Depending on how he finesses his decisions on when to go for broke, versus when to play the cool-headed referee (and there will be times when both are called for), Shumlin will be in a position to both rebuild and enhance his political capital like never before.

Get out the popcorn…

Brock Holding the Auditor’s Office by Only 137 Votes

The Auditor’s race was even tighter than we thought. The following numbers come from the SoS website:

Martha Abbott, Underhill, Progressive 23,545 9.3%
Randy Brock, Swanton, Republican 111,486 44.4% 
Jerry Levy, Brattleboro, Liberty Union  4,229 1.6%
Thomas M. Salmon, Rockingham, Democratic 111,349 44.4%
Write-in Votes  108 0.0%

That’s a measly 137 votes seperating Douglas’s right-hand, GOP go-to guy in the Auditor’s office from Dem challenger Tom Salmon Jr. This means a couple things – one, that Salmon should call for a recount, as I’ve seen more than half that number turn around in a single house district. Two, it means that if just six-tenths of one percent of Martha Abbott’s voters had voted for Salmon instead, Brock’s political career would be over.

Now clearly, if Abbott hadn’t been in the race, it’s indisputable from looking at these numbers that Salmon would’ve won. So although I would rather she hadn’t gotten into the race months after Salmon had already made his intentions known, it may surprise you to read that I’m not all that worked up about it. The fact is that Salmon’s race was so non-existent, it felt almost insulting to me as a voter. Abbott, on the other hand, busted her butt and had a solid campaign. So sure, if I ran the zoo, I’d rather have Brock out and Salmon in, but I aint shedding any tears over it, and can hardly bring myself to blame anybody for feeling so annoyed at having their vote taken for granted by Salmon that they decided to withold it. Candidates have a responsibility to run for the office they float their names for. If they don’t feel the need to, I have little use for them.

But as I’ve said before, if this is the best Brock can do against an opponent like this, Democrats have no excuse not to find a candidate who will actually campaign and bounce him right outta there in 2008.

The Nightmare Scenario: How Bush & Cheney plan to escape.

( – promoted by odum)

Cross-posted at The Next Hurrah and Daily Kos. Which I tell you, because I was told people cared.

So, Democrats have won back the Congress. Impeachment is “off the table,” but Pelosi apparently stands by her assertion that the most valuable part of the victory will be "subpoena power." We’re going to have investigations. And the environment is "target rich" enough, it seems, so that Rep. Henry Waxman, the presumptive chair of the Government Operations Reform and Oversight committee (the Republicans changed the name from Operations to Reform and Oversight in the wake of their 1994 victory, perhaps preemptively overcompensating for their later intention not to conduct any) says, “The most difficult thing will be to pick and choose.”

But as we’ve discussed in the past, (albeit at other blogs) it’s entirely possible that the "administration" may simply refuse to comply with Congressional subpoenas (or may comply only very selectively), whether by invoking the power of the "unitary executive" to block the service of those subpoenas and/or the prosecution of charges of contempt of Congress (the presumptive penalty for non-compliance), or by engaging in a delay-and-litigation strategy aimed at running out the clock before the issues are settled in court — if they can be settled there at all.

Recall that Congressional subponeas are served by the U.S. Marshals Service, and contempt is prosecuted at the discretion of the U.S. Attorney, both under the control of the "unitary executive." And that Cheney has said he will not testify, even if subponaed. And that the "administration" is apparently promising to resist any effort to curtail executive power with "a cataclysmic fight to the death" that will  include a program "to assert that power, and they’re going to fight it all the way to the Supreme Court on every issue, every time, no compromise, no discussion, no negotiation."

Now, some would describe the "cataclysmic fight to the death" as the nightmare scenario. But that scenario at least has a likely ending that’s capable of settling the question: impeachment. The nightmare scenario for me — and likely for emptywheel, as well — goes like this:

Investigations proceed (whether necessary or not). Subpoenas are issued. Assuming their proper service, the "administration," depending on who gets the first subpoenas, perhaps asserts the "tradition" argument. As Cheney put it to George Stephanopoulos:

STEPHANOPOULOS: You’ve talked a lot about the consequences of the Democrats taking over congress in the last week. Nancy Pelosi said this: “we win, speaking of the  Democrats, we get subpoena power.” If you’re subpoenaed by the Democrats, would you go?
CHENEY: I have no idea that I’m going to be subpoenaed. Obviously, we’d sit down and look at it at the time. But probably not in the sense at that Vice President and President and constitutional officers don’t appear before the Congress.
STEPHANOPOULOS: That’s your view of executive power? You?re not going to go up and testify.
CHENEY: I think that’s been the tradition. I can’t  remember the last time a President did appear before the Congress. Or a Vice President.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Gerald Ford, I think.
CHENEY: That’s right. But not on a subpoena, he did it on his own.

Failing that, the next fallback position is litigation, with a particular eye toward running out the clock. What to litigate? Well, litigators themselves know that you can sue over just about anything. And those who’ve watched this "administration’s" litigators know that they’ll go to court with cases that a few short years ago would’ve had you pissing your pants with laughter. So why should this one be any different? They’ll be claiming that for Congress to compel testimony from the executive — and particularly from certain high-ranking officials on matters bearing on "national security" — is… a violation of the Constitutional separation of powers.

And, if you’ve picked your jaw up off the floor and are ready to move on: they’ll be right.

Or at least, they’ll have a colorable claim. Because there really is some truth to that. For the legislative branch to be try to compel some particular action from the executive does raise exactly that issue. Now, it’s true that the legislative branch orders the executive to perform particular actions all the time: furnish thus and such information, prepare a report on this or that by some date certain, etc. Or at least, that used to be the case. But those who’ve followed the story of Bush’s record-shattering numbers of signing statements know that the "theory" this president most often relies on in issuing them is his "inherent power" to act as the nation’s sole authority in matters of "national security" (and maybe others, or any), unconstrained and unconstrainable by either the Congress or the courts.

The intent, of course, is to run out the clock until January 2009, and then moot the whole thing, leaving the Nixon/Reagan/Bush doctrine locked in place by this "ratchet" system, waiting to be pushed forward by the next Republican elected to the White House.

But along the way, Democrats who had counted on taking impeachment "off the table" and depending instead on their plan to expose the wrongdoing of the Bush "administration" will find that they’re once again stuck defending the "nuanced" position, against a White House brazenly claiming the mantle of True Defenders of the Constitution, as always, in defiance of all logic. We’ll be stuck in the position of seeking to violate the separation of powers in order to nail the "administration" for violating the separation of powers — a doctrine we were for, before we were against, I guess. And at the end of the rainbow? A pretty good chance the courts will say, "This is a political problem. You know what your remedy is."

Then, the clock strikes noon, a successor is sworn in, and so it is that this panoply of impeachable crimes joins those unpunished in the wake of Iran-Contra.

Peter Welch: Contributions Profile

(JD’s been busy. – promoted by odum)

So, Peter Welch is going to be our next congressman.  Have you ever asked yourself where his contributions come from? Well, you can find out at Open Secrets, by the Center for Responsive Politics. There’s a wealth of information here, including breakdowns of business, labor, PAC’s, etc. You can look up any U.S. Senator or Congressperson.

So who donated to Peter and, based on that, what can we expect? In political action committee (PAC) contribution breakdowns, Peter got 11.8% from business, 43.4% from labor, and 44.8% from ideological/single issue PAC’s. So it is a safe bet that Peter will be a friend to labor interests. Hopefully, he will support trade policies that will benefit the American worker, and will not support more NAFTA-like agreements. His top contributors were unions of different stripes; teachers, firemen, you name it.

Of the companies that were in the top, Burton snowboards and Green Mountain Coffee Roasters were ones I noticed. Better than Exxon-Mobil, no doubt. Nothing surprising about large Vermont businesses giving donations to political candidates.

I looked up a few of the PAC’s… ‘Forward Together PAC’ seems to be a PAC set up for the purpose of electing Democrats. I couldn’t find much info on it, but ‘Our Common Values PAC’ seems to be of the same kind. Committee for A Livable Future is another Dem PAC, but its purpose is ‘to help elect Democratic Members of Congress who support the policies and principles that will make the U.S. government a partner in building and maintaining livable communities that embody smart growth principles.’ That one sounds pretty good to me. Welch also received $10,000 from the abortion rights group, NARAL.

To be honest, I didn’t see anything to disturbing or shocking. I was expecting something questionable to show up. His top industry contributor were lawyers and law firms ($107,650), no surprise, especially considering that Welch himself is a lawyer. He did receive $2000 from defense industry PACs. Not surprising either.. it’s small, and there are a few defense industries in the state (it would be nice if he didn’t take it, though).

You can even see expenditures there. He spent $34 at Dunkin’ Donuts… if that doesn’t send up a red flag, what will?

So, what does this all mean? Well, as I said before, Peter’s going to be a friend to labor. He’s solidly pro-choice. I think he’ll work to get contracts for the small defense industry (something Pat Leahy has done quite well), good or bad depending on where you stand on that. And he probably won’t support much in the way of tort reform or lawsuits that limit corporate liability (good). All in all, I think it’s a mixed bag, but definitely one that is more in support of our values than against. We’ll see what happens. Whatever the case, as I’ve said before, we need to be vigilant with the Democrats and if they don’t  do the right thing, we’ll let them (and others) know about it.  There is another whole issue underlying this as well… the very idea of how much money gets tossed around in campaigns and wondering what is expected in return. That’s also a big part of the problem.

ADDITION – Tues A.M.: I cross posted this to my site and Daily Kos. On my site, former VT  U.S. Congress candidate Dennis Morriseau asked me about  pro-Israel contributions to Welch. Here was my response:
I spent about an hour researching this, and couldn’t come up with anything. I then called someone I knew who used to work in the State Department and also worked with AIPAC. Apparently, AIPAC does not contribute money to candidates. Their main focus is lobbying. Welch did not take money from the Women’s Alliance for Israel PAC, nor from the Women’s Pro-Israel National PAC. Bernie didn’t either. There is a list of pro-Israel PAC’s here that you can go through (I don’t know if they are single-issue Israel or PACs that are multi-faceted as well as Pro-Israel) here –
http://www.opensecre…
I looked through a few of them and couldn’t find any contributions to Welch. The only thing I could find was a voter guide on the National Jewish Democratic Council’s Voter Guide, at http://njdc.org/take…
It says, according to the questionnaire they sent him, that he is a ‘strong supporter of Israel’, but I couldn’t find any specifics other than that.

You can read more of JD Ryan at five before chaos. But why would you want to?