As a candidate for the U.S. Senate I find it interesting that the Vermont media were quick to announce that Craig Hill has thrown his hat into the Senate race as a Democrat but completely ignored my “Open Letter to Bernie Sanders.” Both events happened the same day, June 21, 2006.

Reference: http://tinyurl.com/h3j64

I know Craig Hill.  I met him at the 9-11 Truth Convergence in Washington DC last summer.  I had a rather extensive conversation with him on the phone after the conference where he was expounding that “both parties are bad.”  He used a lot of vulgarity in our conversation and was quite angry. 

I remember feeling he was “a Republican mole” sent to divert us from focusing on the root cause of 9-11, which was to lay the foundation for endless war.

9-11 was part of a Republican conspiracy for war in my view.  See Project for a New American Century at
Wikipedia — http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pnac

The entire “9-11 Truth Convergence” event seemed like a diversion from the truth that Republicans used the event to justify three wars:  Afghanistan, Iraq and the perpetual “War on Terror.” 

People still ask me “Why would we do it to ourselves?” (9-11) Come on, people!  There’s a lot of money to be made in war for capital conquest, especially when the capital in contest is worth $10 TRILLION! 

After I called the Truth Emergency Convergence event a “Republican scam” on the “moderated” mailing list for the event …. the list was shut down.  End of story.

Now Craig Hill is willing to join one of the parties, the Democrats, which he had previously
put down with extreme anger ( and vulgarity ). 

What strikes me as even odder is that
his web site has only one page, the same page it
has had for many months, and no contact phone number. 

See:  http://hillsenatenow.org/

Furthermore, his one-page web site says that he is a “Green Party Candidate for the U.S. Senate.”
Excuse me?  He doesn’t even have time to change his one-page web site to update it so it says “Democrat” instead of Green and he still DESERVES media coverage and I do NOT deserve coverage?

Furthermore, if you try and go to the Green Party
web site you will end up at the Progressive Party
web site.  Hmmm.  Does this mean the Green party
is the same thing as the Progressive party?

Since Craig Hill is credited with starting the
Vermont Green Party perhaps he can explain why
he is now supporting the Progressive party.

Try it and see : http://www.vermontgreens.org/

The above link is given for the Vermont Green Party given on Politics1 (Vermont) at:

http://www.politics1.com/vt.htm

What’s even more interesting to me is that Hill threw his hat into the race, supposedly, on June 21, 2006 —- the EXACT date
of my “Open Letter to Bernie Sanders.”

It seems that all the major Vermont media have covered Hill’s announcement of a party switch but have ignored my substantial contribution to our political debate.  Has anyone even seen my name
mentioned as a candidate for the U.S. Senate in
ANY Vermont media publication or broadcast?
I’ve been actively running for over a year!

It seems the only NEWS in this event is that he has switched parties.  He was in the race for a
long time as a Green Party candidate. He is basically a one-issue candidate all heated up about the fact that 9-11 was an “inside job.” 

I’ve got a substantial web site, about a book’s worth of material, with many downloadable audio and video files at  http://stevemoyer.us

I have elucidated clear positions on many issues and offered specific solutions.  I’ve done several public access TV shows and low-power radio shows, sent out dozens of press releases to Vermont media, and started the Vermont Democracy Network, making history by being the first person to put a statewide voter registration database on the Internet in searchable form. 
( http://vermont.stevemoyer.us )

Hmmm.  Would someone please tell me how a one-issue candidate without a phone number gets statewide press attention but someone who writes substantial essays and is developing an internet democracy system can’t get the time of day from anyone in the Vermont media?

What’s going on?

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

Only a few weeks ago, the Vermont one time nonprofit “Food and Water” came up in conversation, and a friend and I wondered aloud “What ever happened to (Food and Water founder and Director) Michael Colby?”

Colby, for those who don’t remember, was a take-no-prisoners radical lefty. From outside Vermont, through his many columns and writings, he seemed almost as though he could fit along the edges of “mainstream” American leftism, but in Vermont most of us knew better. Colby has always been a leftist in the more radical mode, however unlike many others with the same ideological tendencies, Colby is highly knowledgable, keeping his pulse on the institutional ebbs and flows of modern capitalism (as opposed to resorting to cliched rants against a 1950’s era communist’s simplistic impression of it). He is also extraordinarily quick witted, and although he struck me the one time I did meet him as typically holier-than-thou and carrying the usual chip on his shoulder, unlike many others in the radical set, he didn’t allow that chip to dull or soften the focus of his considerable intellect one bit.

Well, Colby is back in the news, having been arrested recently at the Negroponte demonstration in St. Johnsbury. And some younger Vermont leftists may be finding he is not what they expect. For example, one would think an activist with such a profile would be jumping in with both feet onto the Progressive Party bandwagon, right? Well, consider the following exchange of comments from PoliticsVT attached to their coverage of last weeks’ Progressive Party news conference:

At 15 June, 2006, Michael Colby said…
This is news? One of the biggest losers in Vermont political history decides he doesn’t want to lose again? It must be a very, very slow news day.

And the Abbott candidacy for Auditor is simply a scheme to try and get a mere 5% of the statewide vote so they can keep their “major” party status. She — and everyone else except the lame and complacent Vermont media — knows it’s all just a sham.

Sorry, but it’s nothing but hysterical that this blog and some of the other Vermont media outlets would call any of this “news,” let alone “breaking news. Pollina is batting about 0-for-6 in his electoral career and his advocacy career is not much better (how are those dairy farmers doing that he’s been helping for fifteen years?).

The media ought to be focusing more on his pathetic track record and his lies earlier this year when he declared that he’d run if the legislature didn’t pass “meaningful healthcare reform.”

If this is all the left has to offer, the left is dead in Vermont.

At 15 June, 2006, rocksandwater said…
How many times did Bernie lose before he won?

At 15 June, 2006, Michael Colby said…
The answer is five. But to compare Bernie with Anthony is like comparing apples to oranges. Whether you agree or not, there’s no question that Bernie can articulate a strong opinion (over and over and over again). Pollina, however, can’t seem to get a complete sentence out without correcting himself, contradicting himself or confusing himself by his own lack of a coherent ideology. Case in point (again): He threw down the gauntlet with regards to the health care issue earlier this year and then did a complete about-face when he realized his own political backside was in jeopardy by following through on his promises.

Look at Pollina’s record: Dairy farmers. How are they doing? Campaign finance reform. He was the ONLY one to benefit from it while everyone else ignored it. In fact, he even spoke out against it when it looked like it wasn’t going to favor his last cmapaign. GMOs. His Rural Vermont outfit failed on this issue miserably, even after agreeing to water down the “farmer protection act” to the point of near-irrelevancy. Health care. Oh nevermind, seemed to be his final opinion on this.

It sure seems like everything he touches fails.

At 15 June, 2006, rowvee said…
Everyone else ignored campaign finance money because they don’t believe in it. They can’t give up the money. I’m sorry Pollina won’t be running. It seems the only statewide vote I’ll cast this year is for Auditor of Accounts.

At 19 June, 2006, GiveTexasBack said…
Holy cow, Michael Colby! Did you run out of ritalin?

Not only are you clueless about what constitutes “news” and what doesn’t, but your fanatic nature makes you about as credible as a Fox News reporter.

By the way, what have the Dems and Repub’s done to help VT dairy farmers? Pollina has almost single-handedly organized and raised enough money to help them own and run their own milk processing plant… no thanks to the corporate processors who refused such a “loser” concept.

Once that launches, the only name you’ll be calling Pollina is “governor”.

At 20 June, 2006, Michael Colby said…
Holy cow, “givetexasback”! Come out from behind your fake name and then we’ll have a discussion. In other words, I don’t respond to cowards.

Surprise!

Or not.

At the risk of speaking for someone I don’t know, I guess I’ll…well…speak for someone I don’t know (realizing full well it may in fact summon him here to likewise beat up on GMD readers…but hey! Who doesn’t love a good debate (well, some don’t I guess…))

Understand: to someone like Colby, there is no difference between the Democrats and the Progressives, and if anything, I’d wager that the Progressives tend to irk him more because of what is, in his eyes, the pretense of greater enlightenment. Ironically, this is exactly the perspective many Progressives have of Democrats and Republicans.

But Colby has a stronger point than they do. When you factor out a subsection of each group: from the Dems, that subset of moderates who really do like things just they way they are, as opposed to those who see fundamental, systemic inequities in the world that need to be addressed – and from the Progs, that subset that is motivated exclusively by their personal distaste for, or alienation from, people in the Democratic Party, then you’re left with two Parties with one major element in common: they are both looking to make the world a better place based on their subjective judgements of what is possible.

Although I’ve complained about politicians who make that judgement in legislative policy decisions, I (and most people I know) still make that institutional calculus against an impression of the greater culture or the overall political system. Lefties like me who are every bit as “out there” as any Progressive Party stalwart but don’t participate in the third-party-thing see the building of another Party institution within a system truly structured to exclude it as a false solution; like saying 2+2=fish – and we see such attempts as not only doomed to failure, but causing destruction in the process. Others who see the system in a different light see such an approach as possible, even necessary.

But at the end of the day, we’re still making our choices based on our judgement of what is possible, and that’s the commonality that to a Michael Colby makes Ds and Ps indistinguishable. To him, political action should not be chosen by such a calculus. It wouldn’t surprise me to hear that he may believe that such a judgement is not even realistic, awash as we are in cultural hegemony. To a Colby, the only question is; “what’s broken?” Once that assessment is made, no quarter can be given in making it right.

There is courage to this approach, and an elegance to its purity. A none-too-small part of me wishes that that part of my intellect which sees such an approach as ultimately doomed to failure would just shut up and let me join in. In my more radical days, I’ve been known to speak from my inner social ecologist and make the claim that I only play a Democrat when I’m “in the matrix” (and by “my more radical days” I mean last Saturday…ask me again how I feel tomorrow and you might get something completely different…I wonder if they have medication for this…?). Some days, it would be nice to pretend there was no matrix.

But those of us who are committed to making the world better in the here and now for as many as we can are intellectual slaved to the game of dealing with the cards we are dealt, as opposed to the game of acceptable casualties in a test of absolute leftist purity.

Still, I’d be lying if I said there weren’t days that I didn’t look at the Michael Colbys of the world and wish that I too were capable of tossing my cards away and kicking the deck from the dealer’s hand…

Consider the folowing from Freyne yesterday:

Mistakenly, the “Rainville criticizes Late-Night Congressional Pay Increases” release contained a notation at the top indicating that, in addition to the Vermont press, it was sent to “dan” at “dipietrodesign.com.”

A couple more clicks led one to Dan DiPietro’s photo and personal bio.

“From 11/05 to 2/06 I created the Martha Rainville for Congress identity, stationery, print collateral and website. Under strict deadlines I worked closely with the campaign manager and was able to develop a theme and visual identity strategy for the project.” 

Since last October, writes DiPietro, he has worked at the Vermont Army National Guard as an “IT Specialist (INET) Webmaster.”

Contacted by “Inside Track” on Monday, DiPietro informed us he is an “E-4 corporal” on “full-time active duty.”

You wouldn’t know it from the press (besides Freyne and the Vermont Guardian), but this fits into the long pattern of Rainville exploiting the National Guard for her personal political ambitions. Notice also that DiPietro has been working on the campaign since October, when Rainville claimed she hadn’t decided on running.

Of course during the months before she “decided”, she also raised an excess of money for her election in violation of the law, as well as had her Reporter-in-residence (now Press Secretary) at the Rutland Herald, Brendan McKenna, writing fluff pieces for her for distribution by the RH.

But take a look at that Freyne quote above again. DiPietro is an IT specialist for the VT National Guard. This news again comes at a time when the Rainville campaign has, according to several tips, been apparently using National Guard lists for campaign phone calls just this week.

So given that such lists could never legally or ethically be made available to a partisan political campaign, if the tips are true (and I have no reason to believe they aren’t) it begs the question: is the Rainville campaign either stealing, or knowingly using property stolen from the Guard to advance her election?

This is no small deal. According to sources, Guard homes’ phones have been ringing this week from the Rainville campaign – including Guard family members who have insisted they aren’t on any political lists, but strangely get these calls anyway.

There have been reports of this for some time, but it’s a difficult thing to confirm. Still, the reports have been piling up for months.

As Rainville herself said:

“It is very important for everyone to realize that support for Guard families is nonpartisan,” Rainville said then. “Anything that would connect the Guard family to politics, even by perception, could be damaging to the families.”

But the fact is that this, if true, goes way beyond appearences. It is hard to conceive of any way the Rainville campaign could be using the personal data of Guard families on the up-and-up.

We also know the press couldn’t care less about this, or any other dirty tricks the Republicans do so gleefully over Vermonters’ telephone lines. Why is hard to say. Adam Quinn pointed out Rainville campaign illegality on Darren Allen’s Hall Monitor “blog” and received no response. Is this laziness? The general contempt traditional media professionals show towards bloggers? The impact of Rainville partisan McKenna on the Herald staff?

Who knows, but the fact is that this smells pretty bad. In fact it stinks. It doesn’t take much to add 2 and 2 in this equation, and given that, it becomes incumbent on the Rainville campaign to explain why things aren’t as bad as they look, if in fact there’s a more benign explanation than the obvious.

In any event, if I were a member of a Guard family receiving these calls, I’d be getting my friends together and demanding an answer – possibly in court.

Odum has previously posted about push-polling by the Tarrant campaign. Now, we learn from Scudder’s campaign that Douglas is doing the same thing. Here’s the message I got from Scudder’s campaign today. I don’t have any other details at present, but the fact that Douglas is willing to stoop to these dishonest tactics this early, in the very week he announces his reelection campaign, shows us all what it means to have a Republican governor.

Now We Know What We’re Up Against

Yesterday, Jim Douglas made it official that he’s running for reelection.  However, many Vermonters found out late last week and over the weekend what we’re really up against.

Over the past several days, Vermonters have received calls from a polling firm with questions designed to smear Scudder and boost Jim Douglas.  They’re out there, testing which message is most effective for a character assassination of Scudder – and what they’re saying is full of exaggerations and misrepresentations.  Make no mistake, this is not a real poll; it’s a negative campaign tactic.

If this is the way they’re going to run the race, we need your help more than ever.  Help us now to raise the money it’s going to take to push back these un-Vermont tricks and promote Scudder’s vision for Vermont.

Together, WE CAN refuse to let these Washington D.C. style tactics gain traction in Vermont.  Let’s keep this campaign real for Vermont.  Please click here to make your most generous contribution now.  Thank you.

( – promoted by Jack McCullough)

One could easily conclude that Richie Rich and Martha Rainville are decent, moderate people as individuals. Still, these two headlines demonstrate what it means to have the Republicans control the House and Senate, and why it is so important to elect Bernie Sanders and Peter Welch:

Cross posted from Rational Resistance

  Who needs help in this country?

If you were an economic policy maker, and you were thinking about which segments of society need a little economic boost, who would get it? The lowest-paid workers in America, or the rich, who are inheriting millions from their parents?

Here’s how the Republicans answer the question:

House Tees Up Estate Tax Reduction

Bid to increase minimum wage nixed

(This is heady wine. Many of us will disagree with a thing or two Moyer has to say, but most of us will, I am sure, agree with much of it. THIS BEARS READING. I do not promote diaries lightly. But this one should be read and discussed on this site, and elsewhere. – promoted by Ed Garcia)

Note:  An audio MP3 file of this letter is on the web at:
http://stevemoyer.us/audio/bernie.mp3

June 21, 2006

Dear Bernie Sanders,

I am an independent candidate for the open U.S. Senate seat in Vermont. As a fellow candidate I want to encourage you
to get “out of the box” of traditional politics and consider some new ideas.

My campaign is focused on two objectives: the demise of the Republican party
and the promotion of virtue in politics. 
My slogan is:
(on the jump. -ed)

“Never vote Republican because Republicans have lost their virtue.” 

They have divided the nation, created unnecessary war and spent this nation into virtual bankruptcy for their own political gain.

I call for the impeachment of George Bush and Richard Cheney, investigations into the multitude of crimes they have
committed against our nation and an end to the fraudulent “war on terror” which has created endless war.
I advocate that we should “teach virtue” at every level of society and insist on it in our politicians.

Our politics is nasty precisely because it is based on competition instead of cooperation, on dominance
instead of consensus and on prejudice rather than principle.  We need a new political system.

Rather than thinking of me as an opponent, I invite you to think of me as someone who
wishes to cooperate with you in creating a better society based on economic and social justice.
The path to justice is paved with the truth.  If we wish to further the
cause of social and economic justice then we must seek the truth, speak the truth
and support the truth.  We must unify around the truth.

In this light I present you with the following ten questions:

1.  Why have you steadfastly refused to call for impeachment hearings?

2.  Why have you refused to insist on re-opening the 9-11 investigation in
light of overwhelming evidence that the official story is a fraud?

3.  Why have you refused to demand investigations into how the Republicans have stolen
two elections and corrupted our democracy?

4.  Why do you vote with the Democrats, accept the endorsement of prominent  Democrats
but refuse to run as a Democrat?

5.  Instant-runoff voting permits voters to rank candidates in order of preference.
It allows more candidates to get involved, decreases negative campaigning, and saves money.
Do you support instant-runoff elections for all elected positions?

6.  Do you support my Vermont Democracy Network initiative which utilizes the Internet
to improve our collective ability to identify good ideas, form coalitions and embrace good leadership?

7.  We have a category-5 economic hurricane coming, indicated by higher interest rates,
higher consumer costs, and a falling dollar. Will you address the root causes of
this economic crisis and tell us how we can free ourselves from dependence on money?

8.  Will you acknowledge that our democracy is strengthened when we have more candidates
to choose from because the people get to consider a wider range of issues and perspectives?

9.  Will you join me in condemning the Republican party as an evil organization dedicated to
serving the interests of the rich and the super-rich while exploiting the passions
and prejudices of poor fools?

10. Secrecy is anathema to a healthy democracy.  I believe that members of secret societies
are untrustworthy with public power. Do you endorse my proposed “Open Government” Constitutional Amendment:

The Open Government Amendment

“Any citizen who has accepted membership in any social, political or religious organization which requires a
secret oath, a secret rite of initiation, or secrecy of its structure or membership shall be ineligible to hold an
elected or appointed position.”

I ran against Senator Jeffords in 2000 as an independent. During the campaign I publicly called
for him to “leave the Republican party and become an independent” which he did the following year
as an “act of conscience.”

Republicans currently have all the investigative power of Congress and they steadfastly refuse
to honestly investigate any of a multitude of crimes committed by Bush Republicans.  The Republicans
have stolen our democracy and I want it back.

I want the Republican party to go away … forever. We the People  can
“make it so” by revealing their crimes against the Constitution, law and human virtue.
Please join me in asking Americans to “never vote Republican.”  It’s one way we can end this horrible
two-party system which has produced a nightmare government.

Some Vermonters have told me that I remind them of you when you started out. It seems to me
that “Bernie the Revolutionary” has changed after 16 years of experience with Washington power
and privilege.  You seem to be “playing politics” in the usual way now.  Remember who you were, Bernie.
You were the hope of the revolution, of economic justice and true social progress. Let’s put our focus back on
the primary task of creating a new political system.

If you win this election then you will be the most progressive member
of the U.S. Senate. I understand one of your heroes is Senator Paul Wellstone
who was the most progressive member of the Senate until his death in a plane
crash in 2002.  Barbara Streisand and many others have asserted that this crash
was “no accident.”  I am concerned for your well being, Bernie.  When I call Republicans “evil” it
is more than just political rhetoric. 

Senator Wellstone was replaced by Norm Coleman, a reactionary Republican, because the
Democrats of Minnesota were unprepared for his untimely death two weeks before the election.
You may need a strategy to protect your life.  I suggest you enlist me a “second choice” candidate
standing behind you, Just like Dick Cheney is more reactionary than George Bush, I am more radical
than you. I volunteer to be your “scary second choice.” This is a strategy the Republicans
will understand.  If you accept this plan, tell the Vermont media to start covering my campaign.

Why not?  Have you considered what would happen if you won the election but were unable to
serve?  The current contingency plan would have Rich Tarrant appointed by the Governor.
Do you really want Rich Tarrant to be your second choice?  This is what could happen
as a result of closing the election to the top two candidates.

I want us to work together to create a better democracy, one which is
free of personality politics and petty prejudices and is based instead on
virtuous principles and consensual processes.

Will you join me in creating a better political system utilizing the Internet to discern
consensus on good ideas and good leadership?  Will you contribute $50,000 towards the
development of the Vermont Democracy Network? That’s only one percent of the $5 million
you will likely spend on your campaign. But it’s enough to create a robust Internet voting
system which will serve us for years to come.

We need a better political system which produces consensual leadership. The Vermont Democracy Network
is a modest beginning. I envision that anyone could become a leader, lobbyist or legislator without money or power.
It would depend on the quality of their ideas and judgment.  Who has good judgment?  These are the people who deserve our
attention rather than those who have buckets of money.

Let’s use the Internet to empower the people to govern ourselves.  It’s all us!

Please help open up this election to more candidates and ideas. Join me in making
  the American political experience one which
is rich with purpose, principle and process.

Courage is a virtue.  I give you courage to do the right thing..

Be well — in mind, body and spirit!

Steve Moyer

http://stevemoyer.us

Independent Candidate for U.S. Senate

RR 1 Box 60, Warren VT 05674

802-882-1949  202-370-6653

References:

Vermont Democracy Network

http://vermont.stevemoyer.us

2004 United States presidential election controversy and irregularities/summary

http://tinyurl.com/pg9vd

The “Plane Crash” of Senator Wellstone

http://www.oilempire.us/wellstone.html

Loose Change – Documentary on 9-11

http://www.loosechange911.com/

http://tinyurl.com/74gyb ( Watch it now on Google Video )

Was the 2004 Election Stolen? ( Rolling Stone )

http://tinyurl.com/njbdc

Bernie Sanders’  Independent Revolution

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20060321_bernie_sanders_interview/

Republican Corruption  Throughout History

http://liberalslikechrist.org/about/gopcorruption.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/_runoff_voting

Instant-Runoff Voting

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant_runoff_voting

I assume most GMD readers (well, the in-state ones, at least) also check out PoliticsVT on their regular blog-sweep. If you don’t already, now would be a good week to start. Currently on tap o’er yonder:

• A discussion of The Hill’s piece about the fact that not even the National Republican Congressional Committee is taking Martha Rainville’s proposed “pledge” to keep the race from “going negative” and to adopt a voluntary spending cap seriously.
• A view we’d like to hear more of: that the Gubernatorial race will be competitive after all. They’ve also included solid coverage of Scudder Parker’s strong criticisms of the Governor’s record, such as this post on agriculture concerns.
• Tracking the ongoing war of words between Tarrant and Sanders over a Bernie-supported agriculture bill – solidly endorsed by pro-farm legislators – that Tarrant is trying to turn into a political football by suggesting it’s anti-dairy, and that Bernie is in the pocket of the awesome sugar beet lobby for a whopping $8000 in contributions. Heh. Bernie comes pretty cheap I guess. That’ll be news to Vermonters (/snark)
• Speaker Symington and Senate President Pro Tem Welch’s concerns about the weather-induced agriculture crisis in Vermont, including the possibility of a special legislative session to tackle it.

All important pieces. PoliticsVT has a tendency to reprint stuff from other sources in toto instead of adding its own commentary and analysis a bit too often for my taste, but frankly who cares? They’ve been highlighting these critical issues this week for Vermont blog-surfers, which is more than GMD’s been doing. Great job folks. See you at the picnic.

From The Addison Independent, the race to fill the vacuum created by the departure of Republican State Representative Connie Houston has turned into one of the most interesting House contests yet:

Republican Kitty Oxholm, who served as the Little City’s [Vergennes’] mayor for four years until March 2005, confirmed on Thursday that she will run for one of two House seats representing the Addison-3 communities of Vergennes, Ferrisburgh, Panton, Addison and Waltham.

Oxholm enters a race that already includes the current mayor of Vergennes, Progressive April Jin; incumbent Rep. Greg Clark, R-Vergennes; Ferrisburgh Democrat Liz Markowski; and Vergennes Democrat Diane Lanpher.

Of course, current Mayor’s April Jin’s candidacy has already stirred the pot based on her recent leading of the strident opposition to a mental health facility in Vergennes. Jack McCullough had strong words in this take-no-prisoners (and hotly debated) diary from last week:

I’ve never met April Jin. I don’t know anything more about her than what I’ve read. What I do know is that when the time came for her to stand up to bigotry she failed that test, and stood with the bigots.

In Addison-3, despite two strong Dems in the race, you’d have to give the advantage to Republicans Clark and Oxholm, all things being equal. But, geez… things couldn’t get much farther from equal in this race at this point. Jin is a unique candidate and will not simply split the left vote, as Progressive candidates are usually presumed to do. So really, who the hell knows how it’s going to play out?

GMD will certainly be keeping an eye on this one…

It’s the most puzzling marriage in the Beltway: Mary Matalin, Republican harridan, and James Carville, the “Ragin’ Cajun.” You ever wonder what that pillow talk must be like? Ewwwwwwww.
Me, I’ve always wondered how they could stand each other. I’m sure a lot of people have. Well, today, I think I found the answer.
And I don’t like it.

The sordid details on the jump.

I discovered this little tidbit in Philip Baruth’s Vermont Daily Briefing:

And now, today, comes word that hits VDB even closer to home: James Carville and Mary Matalin will be holding a fundraiser tomorrow night at their home in Alexandria for Plame-leaker “Scooter” Libby.

Now look — Carville is the Democrat in that marriage, and Matalin is the Republican, and so presumably each cringes and deals with the baggage the other totes into the house.

But some things are over the line, in any marriage.

Yeah, I’ll go along with that. And I have a marriage that would turn a lot of men green with envy. But even my near-idyllic union would not survive if my wife were to act anything like Matalin has in the years since I’ve been aware of her. I’ve always wondered how any Democrat could stand to be in the same room with her, much less be married to her.
Well, now we know.
Baruth goes on to say that this travesty:

…suggests a rather risky and high-profile attempt to rebrand himself, as a consultant moving with Republican candidates as well as Democratic, along the lines of the ethically-rudderless Dick Morris.

I’d ask Carville to “say it ain’t so”, but I’m afraid that if he did, I’d not take his word for it.
Another one bites the dust.
Carville, you are dead to me.
Good night and good luck.

Understand that I generally can’t stand political ads. They tend to be condescending or outright insulting, and often seem put together by people who couldn’t get work in Hollywood. But this one is pretty good, and will be extraordinarily hard for the Rainville camp to criticize without looking like ogres. Yeah, the production is a bit cheesy with the piano and all, but it’s easy to overlook that as the content (Peter discussing his work on health care in the context of his wife’s illness and eventual passing) is strong stuff, and Welch himself comes across very well in it.

My only complaint is one little line. I just think there should be a moratorium on all politicians using the line “and I won’t rest until… [fill in the blank].” These days, that one just pegs the cliche-o-meter.

Check it out at their site by clicking here. It really is a nice piece of campaign advertising and will go a long way towards defining Welch to the electorate (if they show it enough). Now it won’t stop Martha’s swift boat team from going right after Welch on health care (what he is pitching as his stength) in the most nasty, personal way they can – that is the Rove playbook, after all. Hopefully his campaign team will be ready to fire back quickly when that time comes. All in all, though, I continue to feel better and better about this race.