Regular readers will notice I’ve been blowing my top a bit more than usual. So let’s try something new, eh? It’s an experiment and if it doesn’t work we can always put things back…

The Soapblox system that GMD is built on is supposed to lessen flame and rant wars by using a community rating system that more-or-less mirrors the “old” Daily Kos system. It is one of the true strengths of Soapblox, and I’ve only just realized that it wasn’t actually active.

So I’ve activated it (which had actually been my intention from the get-go….oh well…), engaging the community self-policing system that can make these sorts of blogs so cool. It’s at a scaled down level (for now) which reflects the scaled-down traffic at this site, but here’s how it works…

Comment ratings are now a big deal. Now I should say that comment ratings are not to be used as a gauge of whether or not you agree with someone, but rather a rating of whether or not you think their post contributes to the discussion in a constructive or positive way (and nobody has to do any comment rating if they don’t want to). Ratings for new users go from 1 to 4, with 1 being a “poor” post and 4 being “excellent.”

In the current GMD system, once someone receives a combined rating of their last 4 posts of at least 15, they’ll then become a “trusted user.” Trusted users gain the additional ability to “troll rate” – that is, give a post a zero rating. This is to be reserved for true “troll” comments, and not simply comments you strongly disagree with.

What distinguishes a troll? Someone who is not entering a conversation to engage and discuss, but rather to disrupt, either by demeaning or insulting individual posters by name, or by demeaning the culture of this community. Make no mistake, the culture is very much a progressive one (lil ‘p’). And although myself and the other front pagers have Democratic Party leanings, that’s not to say that everyone isn’t welcome to post.

That is to say, though, if you’re going to come in just to say “all Democrats are evil” or “all Progressives are idiots,” then you’re a troll, plain and simple. If a thread or discussion is illustrative of why you gravitate to one party or the other, by all means knock yourself out. If I catch someone troll rating a poster who is truly engaging in a discussion of “why I’m not a Dem” or “why I’m not a Prog,” then I’ll be the first to troll rate them right back. Those are great, and important discussions. “Dems suck” is just disruptive for pettiness sake, as is “Progs suck.” Do it, and get troll rated.

If an individual post gets at least two consecutive zero (troll) ratings from trusted users, it becomes a hidden comment – that is, it is removed from public view (although trusted users will still be able to view it).

And of course, these particular ratings are subject to modification if folks don’t think they’re working out. Obviously there is the potential for abuse (and the dKos folks have experienced some, to be sure). As we add more regular users (there are about 330 registered, but only a handful post), we’ll obviously have to adjust the thresholds.

And this takes off any pressure on me to moderate, especially if I’m in an intemperate mood (hey, I can be troll rated too!)

So, all the more reason to rate folks up! Be generous with the 4s!

From a great and (relatively) new blog, The Yankee Doodler out of New Hampshire (that also covers Vermont):

New Hampshire public servants want to allow chemicals and corn syrup into your pure New Hampshire maple syrup.

Yes, you read that right. The National Uniformity for Food Act (how Soviet-sounding!), co-sponsored by Senator Powerball Gregg and passed in the House with the support by our two hapless lackey reps, Jeb Homophobia Bradley and Charlie “BassMaster”.

Read it and weep:

the legislation… would effectively block states from controlling what goes into food produced or sold in the state, said New Hampshire Agriculture Commissioner Stephen Taylor.

…New Hampshire law requires that anything labeled “New Hampshire maple syrup” be derived entirely from maple-tree sap and have nothing added to it.
…“If our law gets pre-empted, you could put corn syrup in it for all I know,” Taylor said. “It’s just outrageous.”

In case it’s not clear from the above snippet – this is a law that would trump regulations in every state – not just New Hampshire (and not just over maple syrup). And it’s all about overturning California’s “law that requires producers to place warning labels on food that California officials believe could cause cancer or birth defects.” Now try and tell me you’re surprised.

Now, how will the Vermont press and candidates respond to this broadside on Vermont’s emblematic export? Will they notice?

We’ll keep an eye open for any reactions.

The best campaign blog in the state without question is Bernie’s. And it doesn’t just win by default, it’d probably be the best even if the other campaigns were actually committed to maintaining their own. It’s made Bernie’s campaign site the only campaign site I’ll stop in at daily.

As you can imagine, they’ve made real hay out of Tarrant’s refusing to debate, while at the same time trying to crash the US House candidates “Conversations on the Green” (which he didn’t even show up at after all). Here’s blogger ‘David-DC’ on July 13th:

Is this any way for an All-American to try to win a championship? Riding the bench in the hopes that if his team pulls through, no one will be able to tell his ring from those of the starters?…

…As one of many candidates just, you know, hanging out on the green, Rich doesn’t have to say much. Let the people who know and understand issues do the talking, then maybe throw in a “Me too,” or “What he said,” or maybe “I hate hatred,” now and then, just so the folks don’t notice he’s not participating.

And of course, as Tarrant has just been hiding from real debates, he’s also been hiding from some of his own proposals for campaign ground rules. Consider (again from David-DC) all the elements of the proposed campaign ground rules that Tarrant Campaign Spokesperson Kate O’Connor rejected out-of-hand:

1. Reject spending caps that include a 20% bonus for her candidate
2. Reject the elimination of sneaky negative ads
3. Reject his own proposal to bar third-party spending
4. Reject an offer to debate Bernie at least once in every county in the state

So here we are, with both candidates agreeing that they should prohibit third-party spending in this race, but what blows the deal up on that score? Bernie proposes putting teeth in the agreement.

As we’ve seen from the Rainville camp, the GOP candidates are only interested in loophole-ridden psuedo-campaign spending caps that give them an advantage.

All of this gave one GMD reader his own idea that he dropped me in an email rather than write a user diary (ah, stage fright):

[Bernie should] just go ahead and scheduling a series of debates to be held in high school gyms, and Bernie would bring a basketball with him. They could even settle the spending cap issue with a foul shooting contest. For every consecutive shot Tarrant makes, he gets to spend another, say, quarter mil

Heh.

McCain to Tarrant: Get off the train!

July 18, 2006

Sen. John McCain this weekend is bringing his straight-talk express to Vermont on behalf of Congressional candidate Martha Rainville.

But supporters of another GOP candidate for another seat — Senate hopeful Richard Tarrant — could be excused for thinking that the Arizona maverick is also coming to town to support their guy.

In an e-mail sent to supporters yesterday, Tarrant all-but-said McCain was here for him. “Rich Tarrant will campaign with Senator John McCain on Saturday!” the e-mail said. “Please join us: A Town Hall Meeting With Senator John McCain.”

McCain’s people were furious, and immediately denounced the move. “It’s not fair,” said Michael Dennehy, a senior strategist with Straight Talk America, McCain’s organization. “He’s coming to Vermont to campaign for Martha Rainville.”

No word yet from the Tarrant camp; we’ve left a message with campaign manager Tim Lennon. We’ll keep you posted.

Only one word for that: chutzpah!  First he tries to horn in on Peter Welch’s Congressional Town Meetings, then strongly suggests that he’s supported by John McCain.  What is his campaign thinking?  If they can’t control him now, imagine what he’d be like in the Senate!

I’d like to see a huge group going to Rutland on Saturday.  McCain will join Martha Rainville at a town hall meeting at 1 p.m. July 22 in the gymnasium at the College of St. Joseph. This will include a question and answer session:  We can ask if either one supports Bush in his renewed assault on Social Security, We can ask if they believe that invading Iraq with no exit strategy in place ‘supports our troops’. 

We can ask if they believe using depleted uranium and white phosphorus constitutes (the US) using chemical warfare.  We can ask if they support the Geneva Convention, as written.  (McCain is famous for passing his anti-torture amendment, but Bush, in a signing statement, said he would  reserve his constitutional right to waterboard, etc. when it will “assist” in protecting the American people from terrorist attacks.) And on and on.  We need to keep these issues on the front page.

Republicans are increasing our risk of terrorist attacks, not protecting us from them.  Would they address this, and how would they change Administration policy (as if they could!)

Barbara

Rights are asserted with reason.  The statement “health care must be a right” is a contortion of the word and its true meaning.
Rights come from a reasoned understanding of our relationship with nature and each other.  No man has the right to own another.
This was true long before the emancipation proclamation.  It has to do with  “right relations” between people and the necessity
of free will to have the liberty to express itself.  If free will is to be honored then all men must be free to exercise it.  Therefore,
slavery is wrong.  This is how rights are realized.

If you assert that health care MUST be a right then you are diminishing the reasoned assertion that it IS a right.

Health care IS a fundamental human right.

The questions concerning health care are:

1. HOW are we to provide health care for each other
2. WHO is going to bear the burden of the cost
3. HOW MUCH health care is the right amount?

Beyond these three basic questions is the implied question of HOW WILL WE DECIDE?

Yes, we are in a health care crisis.  But much more important is the economic crisis.  Money has failed us.  The focus
of health care has been on the profits for the health care INDUSTRY rather than the health of the people.  Money is a
failed system. It is on artificial life support.  We are living on “debt money” and selling our jobs, our property and our viture
to win “another day for money.”  We are working for money rather than money working for us.  The servant is now master.

Please address the root philosophical problems with the “money paradigm.”  We have everything yet we are acting as if
we can’t afford that which we need.  Why?  The money system serves to enslave us to itself rather than free us from it.
Whether we seek government subsidies and programs or whether we seek money though private sector activities, we are
still chasing  after money.  If money was truly a good thing it would be liberating us from the need for more government and
more money.  Instead, the knot of tyranny grows tigher every year.  Our bondage to money is nearly complete.  Our dependence
on government grows daily. Money and government work together to become the “tyranny of our lives.”

We need to work for freedom FROM money AND government rather than dependence ON money THROUGH government.
We need less government rather than more government.  Money needs competition.  People need choice.

I recognize the necessity for a Universal Health Care System administered through government. Why?  Because
we worked our way into a box where we are incapable of imagining how health care could be delivered in any other way.
But part of the plan needs to be oriented towards REDUCING the cost of health care and INCREASING the health of
the population, without more requirements for money or government control.

How is this possible?  I’ll be laying out my health care plan shortly with specific measures we can take to reduce
the cost of health care and increase the health of the people.  Many of these initiatives are already being taken in
small ways.  They need to be “amped up” so they can be more effective.

Put simply, my plan does MORE with LESS.  Creativity is a virtue.  Truthfulness is a virtue.  Service is a virtue.
When we tell the truth in service to a higher purpose we can create better solutions.

I welcome the opportunity to join in this discussion.

Steve Moyer
Independent Candidate for U.S. Senate
http://stevemoyer.us

P.S.  Remember the 14th amendment:  EQUAL PROTECTION under the law.  Everyone deserves
the SAME health benefits regardless of age, class or other divisions.

On 7/18/06, Sanders for Senate wrote:

  Bernie Believes Health Care is a Right

  Bernie Sanders believes health care must be a right of all citizens, not a privilege.  He also believes we are in the middle of a health care crisis and need action now to help everyone gain access to affordable health care.  We currently have a health care non-system that allows the insurance companies and the pharmaceutical industry to enjoy huge profits while 46 million Americans are uninsured, millions more are under-insured and the cost of health insurance is soaring.  The money spent on health care is staggering.  The U.S. spends twice to three times as much as other developed nations on health care, with too much money wasted on administration costs.

  Fortunately, there’s hope—Bernie has always fought a health care system that would provide affordable coverage for everyone.  He believes we must join every other industrialized country by guaranteeing health care to all our citizens, and we must stop paying the highest prices in the world for prescription drugs.  Bernie has always supported a single-payer health care plan administered by the states, which would allow innovation and the creation of different systems for different needs.  This is a universal health insurance program, not government-run, state administered health care.  The actual care would be delivered through some of the same providers but would be publicly funded.  Patients would be free to choose their doctors or hospitals.  For example, Vermont has the very successful Dr. Dynasaur program that provides health care insurance for children, teenagers, and pregnant women.  Bernie would like to see this program expanded. 

  Bernie’s Strong Record of Achievement on Health Care

  Bernie has accomplished many things to expand access and lower the cost of health care.  Here are some highlights: 

  He expanded health and dental care access for thousands of Vermonters through the establishment of 3 new Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs). 

  He helped thousands of Vermont veterans receive the VA benefits to which they are entitled, and has brought millions into the state for VA health care. 

  He was the first member of Congress to take constituents across the Canadian border for low-cost prescription drugs. Today millions of Americans are buying their medicines abroad and six states have developed drug re-importation programs. 

  Recently, Bernie helped the Health Center in Plainfield health center achieve a new designation that will cover some of its costs in providing medical care on a sliding scale to all of its 7,800 patients.  You can read about it in the Burlington Free Press here.

  ———————————————————————–

—
Think virtue.  Teach virtue.  Live virtue

Lightheartedness Assertiveness Faithfulness Kindness Respect Caring Flexibility Love Responsibility Cleanliness Forgiveness Reverence Compassion Friendliness Mercy Self-discipline Confidence Generosity Moderation Service Consideration Gentleness Modesty Steadfastness Courage Helpfulness Obedience Tact Courtesy Honesty Orderliness Thankfulness Creativity Honor Patience Tolerance Detachment Humility Peacefulness Trust Determination Idealism Prayerfulness Trustworthiness Enthusiasm Joyfulness Purposefulness Truthfulness Excellence Justice Reliability Unity.

“Seek the truth.
Speak the Truth
Support the Truth”

Steve Moyer
Candidate for U.S. Senate

Web site: http://stevemoyer.us 
Blog: http://stevemoyer.us/blog
Vermont Democracy Network: http://vermont.stevemoyer.us

RR1 Box 60,  Warren, VT 05674
802-583-2163  202-370-6653

From the candidates for US House during the “Conversation on the Green” forum:

[Welch]: I’m running for Congress because I believe that America needs to move in a new direction. I believe that the Bush agenda has been wrong for Vermont, and I believe it’s been wrong for America

[Shepard]: “We’re a small state. We’re a state where there’re opportunities, But we really need to have an environment that’s conducive to job growth. That’s been a high priority of mine.”

[Independent candidate Keith Stern]: “Our leadership has dropped the ball. Some of it is from a lack of vision, a lot is from taking care of the political donor class. Whatever the reason, it is now time for a change.”

[Rainville]:

It looks like the Progressives may not be giving the winner of the Democratic primary for Lieutenant Governor a clear shot at incumbent Brian Dubie after all. Petitions are being circulated to put Dr Marvin Malek of Barre on the ballot. Certainly, it is commonplace for “rogue candidates” to leap at open major party ballot slots, and there is no official announcement of Malek’s candidacy on the Progressive Party website – nor was he mentioned at the Prog press conference some time back when Party officials announed their candidate slate. But there are reasons to think that this may not be another Michael Badamo.

First; Anthony Pollina had promised to run for the post if the legislature failed to pursue single-payer health care, and he has received some criticism for not following through. Malek, along with being a medical doctor with a practice in Montpelier, is a high profile activist associated with Vermont Health Care for All, the leading single-payer advocacy organization in the state.

Second; Progressive candidate fopr State Auditor Martha Abbott was apparently furious that Democrats did not leave the Auditor race open for her, reportedly citing the Progressives’ lack of a Lt. Gov candidate as an act of good faith (obviously, this is hard to speculate on – I heard about Dem candidate Tom Salmon Jr’s candidacy months before I heard rumors about Abbott, but that’s not to say there were or weren’t backroom, inter-party discussions on the matter. I couldn’t say).

Third: “Mainstream” Progressive Party activists have been circulating Malek’s petition.

Officially sanctioned or not, Malek could make for a compelling candidate for many on the left, and his years of advocacy work have given him a relatively high profile among the many in the liberal base. We’ll just have to wait and see, as the deadline for signatures is almost upon us.

Is it an omen of things to come? The hand of fate?

If you haven’t heard yet, Hinesburg driver Tom Therrien (who hadn’t yet won a race) came out of nowhere to take the Governor’s Cup 35-lap Tiger Sportsman race in his Scudder Parker-sponsored stock car (and contrary to the Free Press caption, Therrien took the race, not the heat).

Sounds like Scudder got a good day of campaigning in at the track as well. No question, the man is out there working it.

Click below for more pictures…

I was considering a little rant about the Rainville “pledge cards” – the physical manifestation of her million-dollar-cap campaign gimmick, which now even the Free Press is sick of.

Step one — her clean campaign and $1 million election spending cap — was full of loopholes, as her Democratic opponent Sen. Peter Welch and her Republican challenger Sen. Mark Shepard were quick to point out.

Now, let’s move on to other issues that truly matter to Vermonters.

Let’s hear from Rainville on her view of ending the war in Iraq and bringing the troops home, creating more jobs for Vermonters, expanding access to quality health care and insurance, reducing American reliance on foreign oil and other energy issues, her views on the agenda of President Bush, and more.

And why are they sick of it? Rather than rant myself, let me excerpt from Philip at VDB who beat me to the punch:

Rainville’s pledge, then, is a simulation (a “walking shadow,” as Macbeth would say). She knows, for a fact, that outside groups will fund her race. She knows they will run attack ads. She knows that those groups will obscure their connections to her campaign as effectively as they possibly can.

And she knows that she can always profess to be “shocked” — as she did over the NRCC’s $21,000 poll (and accusations of push-polling) — should those expenditures come to light.

In short, the “Clean Campaign Pledge” is a stunt in the worst sense of the word. It’s not even designed to be entertaining: its purpose is to systematically mislead voters into mistaking one of Peter Welch’s greatest strengths — his work on campaign finance in Montpelier — for something more like its opposite.

So what do I mean by a set-up? Consider a few things:

Consider some facts.

Fact one: Rainville is demonstrably NOT concerned about the corrosive nature of big, dirty campaign money in politics:

Rainville collected roughly $130,000 from top GOP leaders in Washington, including many with close financial ties to former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, who resigned his congressional seat earlier this year amidst a growing cloud of legal problems. He officially steps down June 9.

Democrats and some Republicans have criticized Rainville for taking money from some of the same GOP leaders whom she herself criticized in a campaign kickoff speech as having “lost their way,” and as a result lost “the respect of many Americans.”

Fact two: The Rainville camp knows the pledge is full of loopholes. They’re not stupid. Which means they intend to use those loopholes, which means the pledge is bunk from the get-go.

So what’s the point, here? Short term credit with the clean elections crowd? The issue hardly resonates with workaday Vermonters. More likely its about building an “integrity” narrative around Rainville. Given that she’s running at a deficit in that department, what with her own history of accepting questionable money, as well as stammering, stuttering and backpedaling to explain herself, she needs to build herself up by doing what Republican campaigns do best – knocking others down.

So in the short term, they get to try and call Welch a no-goodnik for not signing on (and we all see how well that’s going for them).

But what if he did sign the pledge? What then?

Then the race would be on to grab more moral high ground by getting to accuse him of breaking it. At which point Rainville throws up her hands, says “we tried to be good, but that rotten, rotten Democrat has forced our hand.”

I would guess this would take two weeks at most.

Thing is, by responding to criticisms about “outside expenditures” by rhetorically including them in her thin-to-the-point-of-vaporous “pledge,” she puts herself in the position of getting to define what constitutes a violation – an unaccounted for, or unacknowledged “outside expenditure.”

Like this blog, for instance. Why not? It, of course, has nothing to do with the campaign. Nor does Vermont Daily Briefing, What’s the Point, Rational Resistance, etc. But we would make for as easy a red herring as many possibilities (hey – it’d even be a way to bring in the big nasty blogofascists into the discussion).

I doubt we’d be the first on the list of such excuses, but I can still imagine it. After all, Rainville Communications Director Brendan McKenna showed up at the blogger barbeque, so we know he’s a reader.

And he passed out his stupid little pledge cards. Just to piss people off. Real class act.

What this tells me is that he’s another one of these young turk Republican types, like his “elder” Jim Barnett. Outsiders to the political scene who thought that the political “gotcha” game looked like too much fun, and wanted to get into it just for the pleasure of playing it the nastiest way possible and patting themselves on the back. Not so much interested in ideology as sticking it to people and laughing about it over beers.

And that, ladies and gentleman – as always – is the mentality we are dealing with. Don’t trust it.

Over at Burlington Pol, Haik likes to use “Rocky” graphics to cast Bernie Sanders in the role of underdog prizefighter. It’s compelling imagery, but in my own opinion, the campaign that is most analogous to a ring match thus far is Welch vs. Rainville, where the Welch campaign has followed a trajectory and a strategy that is easy to compare to boxing.

Welch came out to a slow start in the early months of the year (when his campaign was focused on fundraising to the near exclusion of all else). Rainville provided a few opening due to inexperience and confusion, to which Welch responded with careful, guarded jabs – never taking full advantage. Nor did he take full advantage of his position as the more experienced fighter (and as Senate President Pro Tem – sorry, can’t find a boxing analogy for that position) to go after his opponent in the early rounds for maximum advantage.

But now that the fight has been joined in earnest, Welch looks like a champ. Made unsteady by her rookie mistakes, and further set off her stride by the tentative jabs of her opposition, Rainville is on the ropes, and has been playing a rope-a-dope strategy ever since. Welch has been steady, sure and far more aggressive in these middle rounds of the match, steadily (but not excessively) pounding away and keeping her on the ropes and off balance. Clearly Welch is going for a victory on points, rather than a KO, and so far he remains in firm control of the debate.

Rainville has been flailing for an opening. She feels Welch has vulnerability through her so-called “clean campaign pledge,” phony as it is (and more on my concerns about its implications for bloggers like me in a later post), but try as she might, she can’t connect from that angle.

[And trust me, as a former hack, I’ve seen campaigns try to make these sorts of things into issues on the left and it NEVER works – even when there’s a legitimate point to be made. It’s too abstract to an electorate more worried about bread and butter issues – and who generally assume that ALL politicians deal in too much – or too DIRTY – campaign money, so what’s the point? I daresay the only reason the matter of Rainville’s own record of accepting sleazy contributions got any legs at all was NOT because the Welch campaign turned it into an issue, but rather that the Rainville campaign’s continual waffling and dissembling on the matter made it into a COMPETENCE issue]

Rainville is now been pushed into the corner by Welch, who has launched his campaign conversation series with Rainville’s primary opponent, conservative darling and State Senator Mark Shepard of Bennington County. This will continue a steady, easy pounding into Rainville’s exposed gut that will continue, even as it starts doing real long-term damage to her ability to continue the match.

[And for those who might think that Shepard is playing the role of Democratic dupe, think again. This is the best thing that could have happened to the Shepard campaign, and will show Republican primary voters that he is ready, willing and able to take the issues most near and dear to the right-wing base right to the public and the Democratic candidate. All he has to do is hold his own and his numbers against Rainville will start to rise.]

Though nowhere near being knocked out, Rainville was clearly saved by the bell. She’s now caught her breath and has come out aggressively swinging with a new assault on Welch’s defenses:

It has been confirmed that US Senator John McCain (R-AZ) will come to Vermont on behalf of Republican Martha Rainville’s US House campaign.

The potential is there for Rainville to score big standing side-by-side with the popular McCain. A lot of Vermonters like him. Still, there is serious lemonade potential here. Much of the far right GOP base – even in Vermont – loath McCain for what they see as too many compromises and points of common ground with Democrats – which is truly ludicrous when you examine the facts: The Nation:

In fact, McCain has always been far more conservative than either his supporters or detractors acknowledge. In 2004 he earned a perfect 100 percent rating from Phyllis Schlafly’s Eagle Forum and a 0 percent from NARAL. Citizens Against Government Waste dubs him a “taxpayer hero.” He has opposed extension of the assault-weapons ban, federal hate crimes legislation and the International Criminal Court. He has supported school vouchers, a missile defense shield and private accounts for Social Security. Well before 9/11 McCain advocated a new Reagan Doctrine of “rogue-state rollback.”

The pro-life, pro-school prayer, fiercely pro-Iraq War McCain’s record is hardly that of a liberal, and the “maverick” image which has given way to his courtship of the Religious Right was always more about campaign manuevering, rather than reality.

Regardless, it’s that same far-right GOP base that fancies Shepard. A couple well-orchestrated counter events that served to highlight that fact could actually cause a McCain event to further erode her support among this contingent, if things went just right.

In any event, as Welch continues to lead on points, Rainville is going to have to start looking for knockout opportunities as Election Day approaches.

Around Labor Day, start watching for some wild swings.