I’m posting this for a friend, colleague, and ally, Steve Schlipf, who is so busy crunching data for local candidates that he hasn’t got the time to come here and do it himself.

Here’s what he’s got to say about Martha and the Very Bad Crowd:

>>Based on the issues that Martha Rainville holds dear, I am very concerned about the crowd that she has fallen in with.  One of her strong suits has always been taking care of the people she’s responsible for. But what are we seeing now?

>>I can understand that when the importance of environmentalism is a new thing (it was only a few weeks ago that global warming was something that required more study) that it would seem very special to have former EPA chief Christine Whitman come and support you.

>>While an environmentalist would easily argue that Christine Whitman is no environmentalist, I’m looking at the federal judge’s ruling that Christine Whitman misled New Yorkers about air quality after 9/11, leading to incredible health consequences for residents and rescue personnel.  That doesn’t sound like taking care of your people.

>>Maybe that’s an anomaly and Martha just wasn’t aware of this issue.  Let’s look at caring for your people in an area that Martha does know all about.  The Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America has compiled voting records on legislators on issues of concern to troops, veterans and military families since 9/11/2001. This includes 169 House votes and 155 Senate votes.  You can look at the specific votes and the details of who voted how at their website, http://iava.org .

>>But the bottom line is that the average score for Democrats in the House and in the Senate was a B+.  The average GOP score in the House is a C.  The average GOP score in the Senate is a D-.

>>Her website points out “As commandant of the Vermont National Guard, General Rainville has been fully informed of matters affecting the military”.  So why does she support the side that won’t support the troops?<<

NanuqFC for Steve Schlipf
 

The Herald endorsement is not exactly a surprise (unlike the Freeps endorsement of Dunne… although in light of the Freeps’ endorsement of Rich Tarrant this morning, I suppose it was all part of the horse trading going on between the reality based members of the editorial board, and the usual, knee-jerk, live-Republican-or-die editorial suspects over there…).

I’ll admit, part of me was concerned for the RH endorsement, given the high-profile presence of former reporter Brendan McKenna on the Rainville team, along with the Herald’s tolerance for his thinly veiled electioneering on her behalf in the months prior to his leaving the paper. Still, they did the right thing in the end:

Peter Welch, the Democratic candidate for the U.S. House, is knowledgeable, experienced and committed to working for change in Washington, D.C. His Republican opponent, Martha Rainville, has shown herself to be a personable candidate, but she has been unable to show that she fully grasps the scope of the disasters authored by Republicans in Congress and the White House in the last four years.

Welch deserves the support of Vermont voters.

Click here for the whole thing.

In addition to mass murder, tyranny, and grand larceny, Bush Cheney and the Republican party are guilty of identity theft.  Who’s identity?  America’s.  They took over the government despite losing the election of 2000 and proceded to take our identity away from us as a people who are under the rule of law, believe in due process, and expect the government to perform its functions competently and honestly.

Instead they have turned our identity into that of a mindless group of thugs, liars and crooks illegally invading another nation and kidnapping and torturing nationals of many nations. 

We want our identity back. 

[Crossposted on What’s the Point?]

We, in the Vermont blogosphere, have all been plugging away at focusing on Martha Rainville’s forced ambiguous position on the Iraq War — and her similar penchant for trying to have it both ways on a variety of issues.

But, there is one angle that I think has been largely overlooked.

Martha Rainville abandoned her troops in a time of war.

And this is not just me talking here.

It’s recently come to my attention that there’s apparently a wide-spread feeling among many in the Vermont Guard that Martha Rainville put her personal political ambitions over her sworn duty to look after the many brave Vermont men and women who pledged their loyalty and placed their trust in her.

So, when she proudly proclaims that she stood up to the administration to advocate for needed equipment for the Guard serving in Iraq, just remember…

She went and quit the one position where she could’ve had the most influence in doing just that.

Which has created a deep feeling among even Republican-voting Guard members that Ms. Rainville cut and ran when the going got tough. And that she left her troops when they most needed her leadership and advocacy for the most selfish of reasons.

Those are tough words I know. But, that’s a part of the dynamic that will help elect Peter Welch to Congress on November 7th.

[UPDATE 10/31: I have just been politely corrected by Mr. Drysdale as to the relative conservative-ness (uh…conservativity? conservitude?) of the Herald’s editorial page. It seems I may have unfairly tagged them as right wing, despite a history of Democratic endorsements and policy statements consistent with this editorial. Fair enough! Hey, it aint my hometown paper, so I just go by reputations and heresay that reaches my ears (and we all know how accurate that can be). If any Orange County-ers wanna weight in, by all means feel free…)]

The following editorial was brought to my attention by a GMD reader. It’s an affirming read and spot on endorsements of Sanders and Welch – but what’s of particular note is that it comes from the editorial page of the Herald of Randolph, a conservative paper. Editor and Publisher Dick Drysdale (who was kind enough to send the complete text for reproduction here, as it’s currently behind the web site’s subscription wall) is about as far from a wild-eyed left winger as you can get:

Drive Them Out
Editorial: Randolph Herald

What is a free and democratic people to do when their leaders prod them into an unprovoked and unnecessary war, spilling the blood of their sons and daughters in a desolate land in pursuit of vain and foolish ends?

What is such a people to do when they hear their treasured democratic heritage mocked throughout the world and savaged at home by a government that knows neither truth nor honor?

There remains but one recourse for a people burdened with such leaders, and that is to rise in wrath and drive them out.

Drive them out of their marbled offices. Drive them from the reins of power. Drive them out.

Exactly that is the task before the American people in the election of 2006-to exact retribution, simply by casting their ballots to replace Republicans with Democrats in the halls and councils of Washington. Have no doubt about it: This is an historic choice, a choice whether an all-Republican government-House, Senate and Presidency–will be permitted to continue to run roughshod over the nation’s well-being and good name, or whether it will be called to account.

At this writing, replacing the Republican majority in the House of Representatives appears likely; a change in the Senate leadership appears possible. Changing both must be the goal.

That’s why, here in Vermont, the two national races-one for Senate and one for the House-must be decided, this time, on the matter of party affiliation. It hardly matters, this year, that Martha Rainville is a likeable, intelligent, strong-minded, competent new alternative-which she is. Or that Rich Tarrant is a man of proven ability who has doggedly overcome his own inexperience and some bad advice to evolve into an independent-minded candidate with many of the most interesting ideas in the campaign.

What matters, unfortunately for Rainville and Tarrant, is that if elected to Congress, both will vote for Republican speakers and majority leaders and party whips and in so doing they will vote to keep the leadership of the national government in Republican hands. In 2006, this is an unacceptable alternative.

We need not ask candidates Peter Welch and Bernie Sanders precisely what plans they have to end the carnage that President Bush, Defense Secretary Rumsfeld and the rest have wrought. We need only ask that when in Congress the battle lines are drawn, Rep. Welch and Sen. Sanders will be on our side, on America’s side, and not on the side of those whose reckless policies have placed our youths in mortal peril, ransacked our treasury, defamed our precious reputation, and eroded our security.

Vermont will do the right thing when it elects Bernie Sanders and Peter Welch to Congress on Tuesday, Nov. 7.

This mini-mockumentary of another Vermont candidate for the US Senate was up this weekend (and I posted a link), then it was down (and I removed it), now it’s back up again – hopefully to stay. Very entertaining (but long – 10 minutes with both parts combined) from the ladies at the House of Lemay (and I write that like I know who they are, but I really have no idea… if anyone does, please share). Lots of fun (the “circumcision highway” line made me crack up), but please don’t…you know… actually write in her name, please…

Part two can be found here.

This is from a letter to the Rutland Herald:

Martha Rainville will bring integrity back to the office for the people of Vermont.

Integrity is the standard line from Rainville supporters. What makes Rainville a paragon of integrity? The fact that her supporters say so, apparently. We’ve chronicled her flip-flopping on dirty campaign contributions, plagiarism issues (that continued well after the web site had supposedly been scrubbed), her brazen, pandering flip flop on global warming, among other things. If those don’t convince you, here’s a veritable smorgasboard of phoniness as compiled by the VDP communications operation.  While reading, remember that Dictionary.com defines integrity as:

adherence to moral and ethical principles; soundness of moral character; honesty.

On with the show…

Again, I almost never reprint press releases in toto without making fun of them, but Andy Bouska at the VDP has done such a good job compiling this stuff (and few people go to the VDP website as it isn’t a very helpful site at all), folks should get to see some of what the press has been seeing from him.

From a VDP email on the 26th:

SAYS: She is opposed to privatization of Social Security. [“The Greatest Generation” web ad]

DOES: Signs a pledge with the organization, For Our Grandchildren, which is committed to privatizing Social Security. [Caledonian-Record, October 21, 2006]

---

In Tuesday night’s WPTZ debate, Martha Rainville claimed that she:

DOES: Signed a pledge not to raise taxes.

SAYS: Martha Rainville has already proposed a windfall profits tax on oil and gas companies. [Martha Rainville Press Release, July 27, 2006]

From the VDP on the 24th:

14 days before the election, Martha Rainville has decided that the war in Iraq is, as she told WDEV’s Mark Johnson this morning, a “debacle.”

---

Martha Rainville in February:

“Rainville said she believed it was a matter of months before the U.S. military could begin reducing troop strengths in Iraq, though a long-term military presence of some kind was probably inevitable.” [Rutland Herald, February 14, 2006]

“Rainville said Iraqis are relying on American troops but are making progress.  ‘We’re headed in the right direction… They’re almost there.’” [Eagle Times, February 14, 2006]

Rainville: “I think that we are well on track to continue the withdrawal of U.S. Forces because they have been successful in training the Iraqi security forces… As time goes by, each month I think it will require less and less Americans on the ground there.” [VT Guardian, February 17, 2006]

---

Martha Rainville in March:

Rainville: “I can clearly see that we’ll be able to bring more and more of our troops home, not because we want to pull ‘em out of a bad situation, but because they’ve succeeded.” [You Can Quote Me, March 12, 2006]

---

Martha Rainville in August:

Rainville: “We, I believe, are closer than we’ve ever been.” [Bennington Banner, August 23, 2006]

“It’s very difficult for citizens to have an accurate perspective of the war, of our successes, or our weaknesses, how we are actually prosecuting the war and are we meeting our objectives,” Rainville said. “We don’t get well rounded information through the media. What’s reported happens, but so much more is going on, on the ground in Iraq than we are aware of.” [Bennington Banner, August 23, 2006]

---

Martha Rainville in October:

Rainville: Iraq is a “debacle.” [WDEV, Mark Johnson Show, October 24, 2006]

And in a blast from the past, here’s a reminder of Rainville’s “clean campaign” gimmick. From September 12th:

From the start, Martha Rainville has run a campaign with a wink and a nod to the National Republicans – trying to present herself as independent from the national GOP and pledging a “clean campaign,” while relying on the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) to do her campaign dirty work.

There is no such thing as a coincidence when you look at the pattern that continues to emerge:

---

Example 1: 

Immediately following Martha Rainville’s “clean campaign pledge” proposal, a source close to the NRCC stated it would not abide by it, stating, “The NRCC is always going to do what the NRCC needs to do.” [The Hill, June 21, 2006]

---

Example 2:

Martha Rainville proposed the “second component of her plan to restore honesty, integrity and accountability to Washington” on the very same day that her partners at the NRCC reported an expenditure of $21,000 on a poll designed to test negative attacks on Peter Welch. [Martha Rainville Release, July 11, 2006; FEC, July 11, 2006]

---

Example 3:

Once again, on the very same day, Martha Rainville submitted yet another letter with a pitch for her campaign pledge to Peter Welch claiming, “I again urge you to reconsider my Clean Campaign Pledge and join me in setting a positive example for Vermont and for the nation,” the NRCC reserved $240,000 in advertising for Martha Rainville. [Martha Rainville Letter, August 7, 2006; WCAX, August 7, 2006]

---

Example 4:

And yet again, the day after Martha Rainville unveiled the third plank of her “clean campaign,” calling for a website to track the explosion of Republican-led Washington earmarks, the NRCC officially purchased $60,000 in advertising for Martha Rainville’s campaign. [AP, September 9, 2006]

And that’s just a few of my favorites. The VDP Communications operation has been very good this time around, laying out the case for why her integrity is very much in question this election season.

( – promoted by odum)

In response to Matt Dunne’s attempt to make an issue of Lt. Governor Brian Dubie’s schedule in the waning days of the election, Team Dubie attempted a classic Rovian turn-the-issue-on-its-head maneuver by demanding Dunne release his schedule in an attempt to make an issue of Dunne’s absences.

Dunne has responded with the information, and in doing so quickly, has taken the wind out of Dubie’s counter-attack (I’m glad somebody in Vermont besides Bernie appreciates the value of rapid response!).

Still, like any political issue, there’s always a trail of breadcrumbs to the next issue if you know where to look – and thankfully, an astute GMD reader knew exactly where to look and sent me an email. From the AP (emphasis mine):

“My schedule as a part-time legislator is an open book as all of the records are public, including when I paid back the state for any day that I missed,” Dunne said in a written statement. “However, in the interest of transparency, we are compiling those public records for anyone who wants to see them.”

The request for Dunne’s schedule came from Brady Toensing, a Washington, D.C.-based lawyer who is handling Dubie’s schedule request issues.

The part of this report to keep an eye on is that name: Brady Toensing. Toensing isn’t just some local attorney with a shingle on his door – he is a Washington GOP insider.

So the question is, if Dubie is so confident about his re-election (and is such an upstanding guy), why is he turning to a high powered member of the GOP beltway sleaze machine to go after Dunne?

Background: Digenova & Toensing, Mr. Toensing’s Washington firm is a big-name Republican lobbying outfit. And by “Republican,” I don’t simply mean that they favor Republican clients, I mean these are people on a mission that goes back many years… sordid details on the flip…

From the WaPo in ’98:

[Victoria] Toensing, a former federal prosecutor, and [Joe] diGenova, a former U.S. attorney here, wear a number of hats. The law partners are the outside counsel for a House committee’s investigation of the Teamsters union and its ties to the Democrats. The couple also represent the committee’s Republican chairman, Dan Burton of Indiana, in a probe of whether he improperly demanded campaign donations from a lobbyist for Pakistan. Toensing represents Gingrich’s wife, Marianne, on ethics matters.

More recently, Media Matters fleshes out the family firm’s history in the context of their unchallenged “analysis” on CNN and ABC of the Valerie Plame Scandal, and Karl Rove’s unindicted role in the affair:

Toensing was President Reagan’s deputy assistant attorney general and chief counsel to former Sen. Barry Goldwater (R-AZ). DiGenova has been described as a “confidant” of independent counsel Kenneth Starr during the Monica Lewinsky investigation [The Baltimore Sun, 9/21/00] and as “a former federal prosecutor now working for House Republicans” [The Washington Post, 2/23/98]. In 1998, Toensing and DiGenova angered House Democrats by repeatedly discussing the Lewinsky investigation in the media while under contract with the House Committee on Education and the Workforce to investigate the Teamsters union [The Washington Post, 2/13/98].

That’s right. Ken Starr. Monica Lewinsky. The Clinton impeachment. Dubie is running with that crowd. It doesn’t get much ickier, folks.

Now lest you think that the apple may have fallen across the park from the tree (although since he is, in fact, working for his parents’ business, I don’t know why one would assume he isn’t part and parcel to the sleaze), here’s Brady himself on CNN in 2002 discussing the rights of Bush-labeled “enemy combatants” who may happen to be US Citizens:

BRADY TOENSING, ATTORNEY: Well, if the judge follows Supreme Court precedent, I think that they’ll have to find that a United States citizen, once they’re designated as an enemy combatant, can be held.

NEVILLE: And that’s OK by you — his rights are not being violated?

TOENSING: Well, I don’t know if they’re being violated. The judge is going to look at that under a habeas corpus motion.

But the Supreme Court has said that United States citizens can be held by military tribunal if they are designated as enemy combatants. And, in fact, they can be executed.

Why the interest in Vermont? Well, Brady lives here and is been involved in Charlotte’s Zoning Board of Adjustment. He’s also friendly with Kevin Blier’s local religious right/anti-gay organization, the Center for American Cultural Renewal/Vermont Renewal.

In fact, rumor is that he was involved in the ethics attacks on Elizabeth Ready that caused her to lose her post as State Auditor to Randy Brock.

If so, that’s two high-profile races over two cycles – which would leave little doubt that Toensing is a living, breathing straight line of connection between the Vermont GOP and the Washington GOP slime machine.

But the question remains unanswered; why is Dubie getting his hands dirty with this guy?

Maybe he’s scared. Dunne is looking dangerous in the waning days. Perhaps his internal polling has him looking for options.

Or maybe Dubie’s just not the boy scout he presents himself as.

I’ve got nothing to add here, but this latest WCAX/Research 2000 poll of the Vermont Governor’s race is definitely good news for Scudder Parker’s campaign and should provide some good positive energy in the closing days of the contest.

Research 2000 found that Governor Douglas still enjoys favorability above 50 percent… but he also has high negatives.. 44 percent.  While Democrat Scudder Parker has favorability of 44 % , he has negatives of 28%  but no opinion of 28%.

This translates into a race that has tightened.. Douglas leads by ten points 51% to 41%, with only 7 percent undecided. Douglas is more popular with men than women.. more popular in the northern counties than the south.

The more people know about Scudder, the more they like him.

Throw him some cash if you can.

And, c’mon ladies and northern Vermont progressives, get to the polls!

Anybody else think that Scudder’s latest TV ad is goofy? When you see him on the stump, he’s serious, and passionate, and can quote facts and figures about the failures of the Douglas regime.

But for a candidate for whom being taken seriously has been an uphill slog, that TV commercial is like “The Beverly Hillbillies.”

(Speaking of fantasy: The “Promise Scholarships” touted by Jimmy D. in his own commercial amount to indentured servitude — they don’t create the jobs graduates need, they just trap the kids here in burgerflippin’/liftline-attendant land until their debts are paid.)

Maybe Scudder’s media adviser thought something like, “We’ll take all the myths out there about Scudder and attribute them to Douglas, that ought to change a few minds!”

Myth one: alternative energy. The myth about those who favor seeking non-fossil-fuel and non-nuclear sources of energy is that we’ll end up just like the family in this campaign ad, with daughter trying to study by a flickering lamp while dad cycles furiously to generate enough electricity. Scudder says this is really Douglas’s fault because he has opposed wind power and sought to reduce the budget for Efficiency Vermont.

Myth two: property taxes. In this one, a woman in top hat wields a magic wand over her checkbook, trying to increase the value of her account so she can pay her property tax bill. Scudder suggests that higher property taxes are Douglas’s fault, which is the same charge Jimmy D. has thrown at him. The text says Douglas proposed a $22 million property tax increase.

Myth three: healthcare. Here there’s an older guy struggling with duct taping an apparent broken arm, presumably because he doesn’t have health insurance and must make do on his own.

Here’s the problem: the image that sticks with these mythic situations is Scudder’s, not Douglas’s.

If you haven’t seen the ad on TV, check it out at Scudder’s website: http://www.scudderpa…. You need to have a “Flash 8” player or better (you can download it from Adobe for a free 30-day trial) to play the thing.

NanuqFC