Prominent Republican "person of color" (that color being ORANGE...), Congressman John Boehner, launched his campaign for Speaker of the House today with a speech demanding, among other things: tax cuts for the wealthy, more impediments to union organizing, no energy reform, and more. As Minority Leader, Big Orange Rep. Boehner would be the logical vote for Speaker should the GOP manage to capture a House majority.
Here's Boehner in his own, bizarre words:
The president’s government takeover of health care is already wreaking havoc on employers and entrepreneurs. [...] One of the new law’s most controversial mandates requires small businesses to report any total purchases that run more than $600.
Doesn't that sound frightening? You have to wonder why then Congressional Republicans blocked an effort to repeal this provision!
House Ways and Means Chairman Sandy Levin (D-Mich.) offered a bill Friday on the floor that would repeal the mandate included in the healthcare law requiring small businesses to file 1099 forms to the IRS for purchases to suppliers above $600. The mandate is set to take effect in 2012. [...] The bill provides an opportunity to "stand up for millions of Americans and small business or keep a tax loophole and side with companies that ship jobs overseas."
Republicans questioned the offset for the bill that would raise about $19 billion by closing those tax loopholes and said they were disappointed in the process on how the bill was brought to the floor.
Holy cow... is there anything these babies don't whine about? Let's consider just how much damage they could do if turned loose once again to wreak havoc on the Congress.
Gee, in the middle of a record heat wave, just the thought gives me a definite chill!
FYI... remember Boehner was last seen in Alabama's 5th Congressional District when he helped temporary Congressman Parker Griffith (R-Turncoat) sneak past protestors into Griffith's own fundraiser.
Sounds like a titillating prelude to a Revolutionary War film, right? Not quite, just a few choice lines from tea-bagger extraordinaire, right-wing darling and treason-inciting Congressional candidate Rick Barber’s recent television ad. Although if you follow the script, you’d think Barber was running to be the Grand Dragon of an insurgent, violence-prone militia group rather than a representative of the people of Alabama’s 2nd Congressional District. He sure has a flair for the dramatic, though… I guess you could call him a drama queen. Barber embodies everything that the Tea Party seem to represent - and no, that’s not a compliment - and his campaign has been rife with treasonous, violence-spurring, divisive rhetoric, stemming back to the dark day he announced his candidacy (January 6, 2010):
“…our federal government is spending our country into financial ruin.” Where was Mr. Barber when George W. Bush was spending like Paris Hilton on a shopping spree?
“I’m here because the Democrats in Congress are spending my six-year-old daughter’s money before she’s even had the chance to earn it.” I wasn’t aware that we had amended the tax code to include taxing first-graders. I’m assuming Mr. Barber wasn’t paying attention when the prescription drug benefit was enacted, tax cuts were passed, and two astronomically expensive wars were launched under George W. Bush, none of which were paid for.
Barber also sniped at Congressman Bobby Bright, insisting he should have “been a hero” and should have denounced the recent stimulus package. I suppose this means Barber would have opposed helping his OWN constituents? Does anyone else find it humorous how so-called conservatives relentlessly condemn federal spending even as they hold out their OWN hand asking for federal money for their district?
Just when you thought Republicans couldn't get any crazier, enter Rick Barber in AL-02*. "Gather Your Armies" appears to be the latest entry into in the category of batsh*t crazy Republican ads this season, joining entries from Tim James and Dale Peterson. Memo to Barber:James and Peterson both lost.
When asked by Evan McMorris Santoro, Barber denied that the ad, which won't be on the air for another few weeks, is "an inciteful call to arms."
I asked him Barber if, like some conservatives, he thinks that frustration with the government could spill over into actual violence like the kind his ad celebrates. He said that if it does, it probably wouldn't come from the right.
"Most of the violence I've seen has not come from my side," he said. As for his campaign, "I believe in upholding the rule of law, and we need to work inside the system to do that," he said.
Viewers come into the ad partway through a conversation with Barber and the "founding fathers" about the state of the nation. "And I would impeach him," Barber says before launching into his rant about the IRS. I asked Barber who "him" was exactly. He said he supports impeaching anyone who deserves it.
Where the hell is this violence that "is not coming from my side," according to Barber? I sure as hell don't see people on the left out murdering doctors, church-goers and people at museums or bombing clinics, sports events or public buildings. The violence is coming from the right, and people like Rick Barber are egging it on.
Barber will face Martha Roby July 13 in the AL-02 Republican runoff to decide who challenges Rep. Bobby Bright (D) in November. This is shaping up as another tea party vs. "normal" Republicans faceoff. Ok, "semi-normal."
For the better part of a year, the national "experts" have been having vapors over how Bobby Bright is one of the most vulnerable Democrats in Congress. Enter a new poll, from Anzalone-Liszt, that shows nothing of the sort. Bright is over 50% in match-ups with all three prospective Republicans:
In head-to-head scenarios, Bright leads Montgomery City Councilwoman Martha Roby by 24 percentage points (54 percent to 30 percent), state school board member Stephanie Bell by 26 points (55 percent to 29 percent), and businessman Rick Barber by 32 points (58 percent to 26 percent).
It's like many of us have said over and over again, the PVI rating system based on presidential election results breaks down in states like Alabama where the presidential race is essentially uncontested by Democrats. Maybe it's better than nothing, but there's no way an R+16 district in Alabama is equivalent to an R+16 district in Ohio or Florida where the presidentials show up every four years.
BTW, some of us are of the opinion Parker Griffith could have been looking at similar numbers right now had he stayed the course as a Democrat instead of panicking and jumping out of the frying pan into the Republican primary. Not that we want him back ...
Hot on the heels of yesterday's comforting reassurances from Congressman Bright, AL-02 Democrats may have another spot of good(?) news this morning. State Board of Education member Stephanie Bell (R - District 3) told Doc's Political Parlor:
I have, however, seriously considered running for the Second Congressional seat since last March when I attended a meeting in Washington, D.C., with the new U.S. Secretary of Education, members of Congress, several other high level federal officials, and 17 other state board of education members from across the country. In recent months, a draft committee, friends, and my family have all encouraged me to run for Congress.
Bell also said she never mentioned the possibility of running for Secretary of State to anyone -- having heard this rumor from a couple of folks on both sides of the aisle, I am curious as to where it got its start.
The prospect of not being able to primary Beth Chapman out of the seat is disappointing, but I don't have any problems with another contender hopping into the already-crowded GOP fray. Montgomery City Councilwoman Martha Roby and businessman/Tea Party activist Rick Barber entered the primary last year.
Either way, this is yet another helpful reminder that the Democrats still lack a candidate to take on Secretary Chapman in the fall.
These are not particularly good, but I did what I could do. I -- or should I say, my Republican swing-voting parents - recieved another tele town hall phone call from Congressman Bobby Bright. So I tried to transcribe it and live tweet it at the same time, which was nearly impossible. Here are my tweets, and my transcript is below the fold. We got the call about halfway through, so I only have a few questions, unfortunately.
The highlights: pro pay-go, pro-Bush tax cuts, pro ... consumer protections? And his dad taught him to go home with the one who brought you to the dance. Onward:
Bobby Bright telephone town hall! Live tweeting begins. Someone is talking about home ownership. #alpolitics #al02
Someone asked what he plans to do in December: "I believe in going home with the one you went to the dance with." #alpolitics
Caller asks abt no social sec cost of living increase - Bright: "It's not political shenanigans going on, it's how the law is" #alpolitics
Bright says he sent a letter to Obama and his colleagues today to extend Bush tax cuts two years; wants to make them permanent #alpolitics
Deficit question. Caller says deficit is going to 'eat up this country' - Bright agrees. Caller is GOP, also says he'd vote for Bright again
Bright: "That wasn't solicited." Based on the make-up of our household - I'm betting he's targeting swing-voting Rs
(With the phone call that is)
Bright's hoping for a SOTU freeze on everything BUT military spending. Also keeping fingers cross for return to pay-go
Bright mentions a fiscal blue print the blue dogs released this week with ~fifteen steps to deficit reduction~ #alpolitics
Bright: Thanks very much Mr. Seamon, hope to see you when I'm in heaven. <--- ... is that a common phrase? I'm serious.
A prattville question!
Bobby Bright does not consider himself a politician, he considers himself a public servant. Shockingly, I almost agree.
I don't like his convictions, but ... y'know, at least he has them.
The basic complaint: not enough tax breaks for people with no dependents. Also, interest rates.
Bright: I supported the credit card bill of rights last year giving cardholders more leverage against credit companies. #alpolitics
Via Facebook, the Davis campaign is hosting the grand opening of their Montgomery headquarters on Tuesday the 19th from 5pm to 7pm. I'll be there and I hope some of you will too! I've been waiting for some word about a Montgomery office from the campaign -- even though I know it was a little irrational to start my waiting so early.
Conveniently, Rep. Bobby Bright's Montgomery office is at the same street address. Won't it be fun if they're neighbors? Especially if Bright is going to need as much help turning out black voters in the district as this new New York Times article postulates:
Political analysts say Mr. Bright is smart to pay attention to the Wiregrass voters. He might not be able to count on such an enormous turnout among black voters in 2010 — even if, as is possible, Representative Artur Davis becomes the first black Democratic nominee for governor in Alabama history — leaving Mr. Bright to depend on people who normally vote Republican, a tall order.
It's a fun read. My favorite quote, by far, is at the tail end - wherein a "cautious" supporter of Bright admits it would be easier to support him openly if he were a Republican. Republicans: against the two-party system at all costs! Even the ones that agree with them.
[EDIT]: Since I've um, exceeded my two posts in 24 hours limit, I'll share this here. It's still relevent. Rep. Davis is also being featured as one of Politico's 25 Politicians To Watch In 2010.
Davis, who is vying to become the first African-American governor in the Deep South since Reconstruction, has an amazingly delicate balancing act in front of him. First he must win over skeptics in the Alabama Democratic establishment to capture the party nomination in the June primary. But he must do it without compromising his ability to compete as a black candidate in a conservative state where President Obama and the national Democratic agenda are highly unpopular. If Davis manages the feat, he’ll have rewritten all the rules of Southern politics.
1. Vote gainst the political leanings of their district,
2. Vote gainst key Democratic party legislation, and
3. Be less valuable than a Republican in the same seat.
(Hat tip to Kristopher from The World Around You - I spotted this gem from 538 in Kris' twitter stream.)
Nate Silver explains the last point:
On the other end of the spectrum are a handful of Democrats who have negative scores. They vote with their party less often than a generic congressman from their district would, even without guaranteeing that the generic congressman is a Democrat.
In other words, these are people who potentially deserve a primary challenge -- on average, dumping them would leave the Democrats better off, even if there's some chance that they'd be replaced by a Republican.
Now, I'm not particularly inclined to agree that any Republican would be more valuable than a Democrat in Bobby Bright's seat -- largely because my personal disagreement with his votes clashes with what I consider valuable pro-Dem PR in my district. I like to think that Rep. Bright, in all his niceness, is doing his small part to convince people Congressional liberals aren't all small-minded filthy heathen baby-killers, and that's always a positive. One must take small victories where zie can.
In Griffith and Davis' seats, I find Silver's argument holds a smidge less water - I can't imagine that someone who isn't Parker Griffith in that seat would vote against the Dems as consistently as he did. I also imagine that Davis' gubernatorial bid has a lot to do with his votes this year, and his successor will be a little more friendly to the best interests of the district.
In terms of numbers, I think Artur Davis' ranking on Silver's chart is the most fascinating -- Silver puts the district as D+18, and Rep. Davis' voting record this year is a stark contrast to what would generally be considered the (admittedly, Congressional) political security of falling in line with the Democrats on even some, if not all, of this session's major issues in a district that swung that far to the Democrats.
So while you are recovering from your festivities of choice today, think it over, and let me know: what say you?
Also: if you want to help send "more valuable" Alabama Reps to Congress next year, don't forget to donate to AL-03's Josh Segall and this adorable pooch, the Send Parker Griffith Home fund, and the Democratic primary candidate of your choice in AL-07 - check the list in the sidebar. And maybe the state party too? I volunteer there, so.
(Well, that's good news. Bright, while a conservative (with small "c") Democrat, is still a DEMOCRAT. Parker Griffith: take note.... - promoted by countrycat)
With Griffith’s announcement Tuesday, eyes immediately turned to his home state freshman counterpart, Rep. Bobby Bright.
But Bright told the House Democratic leadership Tuesday night that he planned to stay in the party, according to a senior Democratic aide.
A wise move. As Swing State Project's James points out, Griffith made a ridiculous move by putting himself in a position to be Scozzafava'd out of the race entirely by frustrated conservatives.
I sent a letter to Congressman Bright earlier today expressing my support for what he's done as a Democrat, and if you're in AL-02, I'd encourage you to do the same - even if you're only glad he's not Jay Love.
I live in Prattville and I am, on very rare occassions, not all that troubled with calling Bobby Bright my Congressman.
In his defense, he voted to deny Presidents (former, sitting, and their families) the power to block release of public White House records. On the other hand, he's voted against almost every major piece of legislation out of Congress (including the stimulus package and health care, though he was totes for the Stupak amendment.)
The point is: tonight my house got a phone call to join one of his tele-town halls (evidently he's held eight so far; this is my first) and for your sake, I live tweeted the whole thing.
THE HIGHLIGHTS:
Rep. Bright loves small businesses, ten thousand percent of the respondents to his magical phone poll don't support the health care bill, and he says no to a lot of things. (I missed this, but at one point he said he 'wished they would come up with something he didn't have to say no to.' I cried on the inside.)
National Republican Congressional Committee spokesman Andy Sere hinted, Republicans will go after Bright for his "sharp left turn toward Obama's reckless agenda."
"After just eight months in Congress, [Bright] has lost touch with everyday Alabamians," Sere said.
Rep. Bobby Bright (D, AL-02) has scheduled several meetings around his district in the coming week. All are open to the public. Full schedule below the fold.
Go see him and tell him your expectations for a representative.
Bobby Bright is better at getting free, favorable media than just about any politician I can think of. The latest example is this U.S. News & World Report piece, Congressman Bobby Bright: A Maverick Democrat in Republican Country. Cue the Magnificent Seven theme music and cowboy video. Or maybe that should be John McCain video ...
I like this about Bright:
In a Congress rife with people of privilege, he is rare for having labored as a ditch digger, roofer, prison guard, cook, hotel porter, financial adviser, and teacher before settling into practicing law. Whatever you do, don't ask him for a bailout. "I've never had anybody bail me out," he says. "I've never had anybody in my family who was wealthy enough to attempt to even talk to about bailing me out."
And I recognize the truth in this, but I don't like it one bit:
House Democrat Artur Davis of Alabama, who recruited Bright, says that Democrats had enough votes to pass those bills and that it was plain from the start that Bright would not be a rubber stamp. Davis says Bright's positions on issues from gay rights to illegal immigration mesh with mostly rural southeastern Alabama. "He's the only Democrat who could have won in that district," Davis says.
Bright voted with Democrats for Nancy Pelosi as Speaker of the House. I'm still waiting for another important vote where he acts like a Democrat. Health care? Card check? I'm not holding my breath, but maybe Democrats will continue to have enough votes to pass those without Bobby Bright.
Congressman Bright is holding Congress on Your Corner meetings around his district tomorrow -- there were some today as well but those are kind of irrelevant at this point. The schedule for Saturday is below the fold.
All Things Considered did a little profile of Bobby Bright over the weekend. You can listen (about 4 minutes) at this link -- you have to click on "Listen Now." On the office space assignment lottery, Bright had this to say:
You know what? I'd practice out of the trunk of my car if they told me they didn't have office space for me. That's just how proud I am to be here, representing the people of Alabama.
The first rule of politics is that a representative has to represent the people in the district. Many of us here decry the conservative nature of the Alabama delegation, but the answer to that is to engage in the political discussion and change the political wind -- and to challenge those representatives who are voting well to the right of their constituencies. I suspect Bobby Bright is as progressive as we'll get in AL-02 until we change the wind there.
I expected the Advertiser to endorse Mike Rogers, the incumbent in AL-03, which makes this all the sweeter for Josh Segall. The headline is all Bobby Bright but they make a great case for Josh Segall further down.
[T]he Montgomery Advertiser believes the voters should give Segall a chance to stir things up a bit in Congress.
While he has tried to put some distance between himself and the president in the past year, Rogers has been a strong supporter of the policies of President Bush in the past, and voters can see the results in their 401k's.
Rogers has been a strong supporter of the war in Iraq, and continues to defend the need to be there. Segall recognizes the drain the war has placed on the nation's economy and, more important, its military service members, and supports developing a timetable for withdrawal.
Segall also has criticized the $700 billion bailout of the nation's financial industries, saying it is too much money "to bail out the people who messed up the situation in the first place" and that it does not do enough for everyday Alabamians.
They also throw their support behind Bobby Bright in the 2nd district congressional race and have harsh words for the negative advertising that has been a hallmark of this race from start to finish.
For the most part, Bright has kept those ads that he directly controls from direct attacks on Love. But the reverse hasn't been the case; Love's campaign has targeted Bright with attack ad after attack ad. He especially has tried to link Bright to such liberal Democrats as House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Love's constant invocations of Pelosi's name made it sound more like he was running against her than Bright.
If Love were running against Pelosi, he'd have our endorsement. But he's not. He's running against a Democrat who is conservative on many issues, such as immigration and crime, and who is middle of the road on other issues. Otherwise, Bright never would have won election twice in a city such as Montgomery.
Bright has been a very good mayor, handling the city's finances in a responsible and fiscally sound manner.
...
More so than Love, in our opinion, Bright has shown a willingness to work across party lines to get things done for the community.
Do newspaper endorsements matter these days? A recent study found that they do, particularly if the paper endorses in an unexpected direction.
Endorsements are influential in the sense that voters are more likely to support the recommended candidate after publication of the endorsement. The degree of this influence, however, depends upon the credibility of the endorsement. In this way, endorsements for the Democratic candidate from left-leaning newspapers are less influential than are endorsements from neutral or right-leaning newspapers, and likewise for endorsements for the Republican. These findings suggest that voters do rely on the media for information during campaigns but that the extent of this reliance depends upon the degree and direction of any bias.
Who would have predicted a year ago that the Montgomery Advertiser would endorse not one but two Democrats for Congress?
The D-trip has a couple of new Alabama ads up today. Since the Wayne Parker folks played their 9/11 ad after tonights candidate debate, I'll start with the one in AL-05. Remember, the NRCC and Freedom’s Watch both had misleading attack ads invoking 9/11 and terrorism pulled from the air in North Alabama. This is how the DCCC responded:
Wayne Parker and his Washington allies are shamefully using 9/11 to smear Parker Griffith. Even a local TV station refused to run the group's attack ads and the minister hosting the candidate forum said he was shocked by the misuse of Griffith's quote.
Here's the latest Jay Love ad from the DCCC, which I think is pretty darned effective. It's a rather lighthearted way to summarize their previous charges against Love: he didn't provide healthcare for 80% of employees, was supported by Freedom's Watch backer Sheldon Adelson and took travel expenses from the state while living just 8 miles from the State House.
This is a good time to look at the independent expenditures in this race over the last few days, courtesy of Swing State Project. They update the information at that link very frequently and it's a great resource.
That's the new rating of the Bright/Love race from CQ Politics and it represents a change in Bright's direction from the previous "Leans Republican."
The political history of the southeastern Alabama district still suggests an inherent Republican advantage, and the GOP had a strong and very well-funded candidate in state Rep. Jay Love. But Bright has burnished his efforts to build a profile as a conservative Democrat by obtaining the endorsements of the Blue Dog Coalition, a group of conservative-leaning House Democrats; the Business-Industry Political Action Committee, which mostly endorses Republican candidates; and perhaps the biggest surprise, state Sen. Harri Anne Smith, a staunch conservative who lost narrowly to Love in the July Republican primary runoff.
Republicans, though, assert they will win by persuading voters that Bright would go to Washington and be a foot soldier for the liberal House Democratic leadership. After using a football analogy arcane to all but fans of the district’s Auburn University and arch-rival University of Alabama, Love campaign spokesman Todd Stacy said, “He’s on the wrong team, so he’s trying to convince people that teams don’t matter. Well, teams do matter.”
Teams do matter, and Bright is on the winning team this year. In spite of all the money Love and his right wing pals have dumped into this race, they're sliding backwards toward election day.
The Republicans, especially "independent" organizations like the National Republican Congressional Committee and Freedom's Watch have been running very negative "gotcha" style ads in an attempt to smear Democrats in Congressional races across the country. Alabama's 2nd District provides a textbook example of how the smear merchants do their dirty work.
Typically, they use only a snippet of some statement by a Democrat. The video below illustrates the technique -- the first 7 seconds or so is footage from this Jay Love ad (note, this is from the Love campaign, not an independent group) which features about 4 seconds of a reporter's question and the response from Mayor Bobby Bright. Clearly, the Love campaign clipped both the question and the answer in mid-sentence. This should always be a red flag. There's more to that Love ad, but the clip at the beginning is an egregious distortion of Bright's words, as you can see for yourself. The remainder of the video below shows the setup of the question and the rest of Bright's response, which runs to about a minute.
The cherrypicking of Bright's words is so blatant in this commercial that it attracted the attention of the reporter heard off-camera asking who Bright supported for president. This is from Eileen Jones of WSFA and the words in bold are the ones used in the Love ad:
And, this was Bright's complete answer to the question. "Are you asking me if I support Barack Obama? " he asked. I then repeated the name, "Barack Obama." Bright then said emphatically, "Yes, but let me tell you why because if he's president I'm going to work with him. I'm going to build that bridge and make sure I don't turn him away before I ever get started. Let me tell you something else that I can elaborate on. You know what? If John McCain gets to be president, you know what; I'm going to support him too."
During an interview with Love, I asked him about the political ad he's running. "The question is why did you leave off that last part?"
Love's response was "Well, the question was do you support Barack Obama? That's what you asked and his answer was ‘yes.'" I then asked another question. "But, his answer was I support Barack Obama and I support John McCain." Love had a quick response. "Well, you can't have it both ways Eileen. Either you support Barack Obama or you support John McCain."
Actually, Bright said a lot more than even Ms. Jones quoted -- he gave a thoughtful answer that can be roughly boiled down to this: "I support whoever is President because he will be the President and I will try to work with him." Bright mentioned Obama, McCain and even George Bush. This isn't a radical position. Many if not most Americans think our going-in position should be to support the current President, whoever it is. Love's campaign went for the cheap shot, cutting a 1 minute response down to 4 seconds in an attempt to link Bobby Bright to Barack Obama. It's intellectually dishonest, the WSFA reporter called them on it and it probably wasn't even worth it in the first place, since linking Democrats to Obama failed spectacularly in special elections earlier this year -- even in the South. Definitely a loser for Love.
The modern Republican party or the modern conservative movement, if you prefer, seems to have a problem with the honest discussion of ideas, maybe because they are out of ideas. They prefer "gotcha" politics of extracting a few words out of context and telling voters what their opponent "really meant" by those few seconds. These clever soundbites don't make for good government and or credit voters for interest in or understanding of the legitimate differences between the candidates. The underlying assumption is that voters are pretty damned stupid and the media is pretty damned lazy. Change those assumptions and "gotcha" smears like this one are apt to backfire on their purveyors, as this one has.
Here's to a better informed populace and a more active media, and the hope that the two will lead to better government for all of us. Remember, cheap shots and "gotcha" smear ads only work if you vote for the smear-mongers.
T.H.E. Social Work Agency Adoption home studies & care management services in the North Alabama area.
Licensed, certified, caring social workers. blog advertising is good for you
