Showing posts with label Democrats. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Democrats. Show all posts

Wednesday, May 12, 2010

Another Late Night (Early Morning) Rant

Ya know, it seems I can't have a coherent string of thoughts in the middle of the day. But for some reason, if I stay up all night: Verbal diarrhea!

It's been a while, so let's see what I can cover.

Health Care Reform

We went from "Universal Health Care" to "Affordable Health Care" to "Health Care Reform". What a year! I would warn conservatives that while "ObamaCare" might seem like a catchy buzzword, linking your opposition to health care reform while simultaneously bashing it, will backfire once many of the provisions become active. You opposed "exchanges" and "banning pre-existing conditions" and "free physicals" and "end-of-life counseling?" Are you friggin' nuts? If I were Obama, I would start using "ObamaCare" as part of my reelection slogan now.

Drill Baby, Dr..., OOPS! Plug Baby, Plug!!

I feel for President Obama. Just as he was trying to build support among moderate Republicans (all 3.5 of them) for "Cap and Trade" legislation by dropping the ban on offshore oil drilling, BP has a huge offshore drilling disaster. Kinda like Lucy holding the football for Charlie Brown. AARGH!

On the upside, Mr. Obama has taken the pragmatic pro-nuclear power approach. Hopefully, that works out a little better.

Tanning Bed + Arizona = Awkward Questions

I don't look illegal...Do I?

I actually feel bad for the police and sheriffs in Arizona. One law just turned a bunch of consummate professionals into career racists. Of course the real racists are having a field day.

Tea Partay!!!

The tea party movement, or--as it used to be called--the Republican Party, has so far successfully defeated two of its power players in major senate races. Charlie Crist is trying to pull a "Lieberman" in Florida and I don't know what the hell Bob Bennett is going to do. John McCain is officially on notice.

Of course, this could be good for Dems come November. If Republicans try to overplay their hand with extremely conservative candidates, moderate Democrats will capitalize. I'm interested to see what happens in the KY primaries next week. Rand Paul appears to be riding daddy's last name to a big win. Right now, I'm supporting Dr. Daniel Mongiardo for the Democratic side. He's actually been a vocal supporter of President Obama since early 2008. Jack Conway is a fairly unknown quantity to me, but seems like he could be a superstar in the party. (He's a pretty-boy* with a good head on his shoulders.) Either way, I like our chances in November.

So far, spring has been pretty good to us progressives. I'm going to research Elana Kagan a bit more before I have a full-fledged rant about her as Obama's SCOTUS Justice nominee. Maybe I'll have another late night before summer.

*Being a person of average appearance, I've always been distrustful of attractive people. They tend to "play" a bit more than the rest of us. My first real political support went to Paul Tsongas in 1992 (I was 16), then Howard Dean in 2004, followed by Bill Richardson in 2008. Clearly, I like 'em average. No offense Dr. Mongiardo!

Sunday, June 14, 2009

WHOA!! Universal Health Care?

Here's the thing...

President Obama is taking on every possible issue in his first year in office. The problem is that he and many Democrats in the Senate seem to think they are still out of power. Why did the stimulus package have tax cuts? Oh yeah, capitulation to the Republicans. That was an extra 250+ billion that could have been used to confront some other issues. Now we are going to have an extended presence in Iraq for the next year. We're getting bogged down in Afghanistan and Pakistan, virtually eradicating any savings we might expect from a "draw down" in Iraq. Now, my party, the party of "Inclusion" is walking on egg shells when it comes to Health Care.

The first problem I have with the preliminary impressions of Obama's health plan is coverage. Voluntary coverage, though it appeals to the American sense of independence, is not good enough. Again, details are hard to come by. Perhaps health coverage of some sort will end up being required by the federal government. Who knows?

Another problem is perception. Regardless of whether this plan passes, and regardless of how good and inexpensive the coverage is, it may be difficult to get a significant part of the population to buy into it. Think about public transportation. In areas where affluent or middle class people use public transportation, it thrives and is able to grow in service quality and coverage. If the only people using public transportation are poor, the local government ends up throwing "good money after bad" in an effort to keep it available. The same could happen to a voluntary public health care plan.

Democrats will have to step up and ask for single payer health care or some similar idea (like my triple-payer plan), or they will be at the forefront of a potential failure that only lends credibility to the Republican arguments about government intervention and efficiency. It could be several election cycles before we recover from that.

Think hard Dems! We need leadership on this issue. In addition to health care, we need to confront immigration, tax policy, education, and environmental issues. Don't waste your time on a health care plan that will fail to win over the American people. It will cost you political capital on everything else you try to do.

Wednesday, December 12, 2007

Republican/Democrat Primary Rundown

I think that it's time to evaluate what's happening in this big cluster@#%* called a Presidential Primary.

First off, this kind of open field is nearly unprecedented. The only thing that would make it more confusing is if we had a three party system (which we should).

Secondly, the Democrats are far too positive about their choices than they should be, while Republicans have the opposite problem.

Thirdly, the top three candidates on either side are not the most qualified or the least divisive of the parties' offerings. This still confounds me.

Fourth(ly?), Hillary Clinton is a disaster waiting to happen. Democrats would be wise to dump her before she becomes a liability.

In the Fifth place, Rudy Giuliani should likewise be dumped before he splits the Republican party in two. Everything they have built for the last 30 years would be destroyed in one election cycle.

Sixthish, the writer's union strike is seriously effecting my mood. All my favorite television shows are having truncated seasons. Unless something gets resolved soon, we're going to be forced to watch all 24 hours of the 24 hour cable news outlets' programming.

Lastly, Bill Richardson for President!

Tuesday, June 05, 2007

Democratic DEBATE

This is how I ranked their performances from best to worst:

1. John Edwards: He really mixed things up with Clinton and Obama trying to move up in the standings.

2. Joe Biden: He gave some of the most impassioned responses of the night. I've always enjoyed his candor and demeanor. Strikes me as a more liberal version of Harry Truman.

3. Barack Obama: For standing your ground against attacks from John Edwards.

4. Bill Richardson: His answers were a little "heavy," but alot of Democratic primary voters like that. See John Kerry 2004. The media's giving you a hard time for some reason.

5. Mike Gravel: Love to see somebody pick on the big guys!

6. Hillary Clinton: I'm not sure she's trying to win the Democratic primary. We're safer than we were on 9/11? Is she running for Rudy's VP? She still has good stage presence. I'll give her points for that.

7. Dennis Kucinich: He just reminds me of the OLD liberal: Authoritarian, a spend thrift, and enamoured with all things European. We've got to keep him in the race to remind everybody that most Democrats are not to the far left.

8. Chris Dodd: I like Chris Dodd, but this was a pitiful performance. Partly it was due to CNN and the chuckleheads from New Hampshire. He needed (as did many of the lower tier candidates) to "insert" himself into the debate like Edwards was doing. When they don't do that, they look like they're auditioning for somebody's VP or Secretary of State. It's hard to get supporters if they don't think you're serious.

All in all a better debate than MSNBC put on. I can't stand Wolf Blitzer anymore. Some of the questions would have been better served in a "Rock the Vote" debate on MTV. We depend on CNN to be substantive. They're certainly not entertaining.

This debate probably didn't change much of anything. Edwards, Biden, and Richardson might get a bump. Hillary didn't do herself any favors with the core Democratic primary voter. In her mind, she's already "put this thing to bed" and is now running against the presumptive Republican nominee. I doubt we'll roll over that easily.

Thursday, May 31, 2007

Sleep Good

Steve Beshear is our man. Primary voters voted on May 22 and gave him a substantial vote for the Democratic nomination considering the size of the field. We actually avoided a runoff. He will face off against current governor, Ernie Fletcher in November. I wish Mr. Beshear the best.

It's been a slow start to the Presidential primary season. The field of Democrats is still pretty much where it was before the first debate. Clinton, Obama, and Edwards are all clustered at the top in national polls. The polls in Iowa show some movement, but it is more or less insignificant. My man Bill looks to be gaining some support in early primary states, so that's interesting. Otherwise, boring.

The next Presidential debate is set for Sunday, June 3rd. Maybe some news will come out of that.

Tuesday, May 08, 2007

Jonathan Miller Quits,

Well I'll be a monkey's uncle.

This is twice in two consecutive governor's races that my preferred candidate dropped out within weeks of the election. What gives?

I could see dropping out two or three months before the primary, but damn. The election is two weeks away. You hate Steve Henry and Bruce Lunsford so bad that you alienate your supporters? I can't say that I was a fanatic about your candidacy, but you were the only one I could stand to look at and listen to. I hate political calculating.

Ironically, Bruce Lunsford, who has done well in recent polling, was the last candidate to do this to me. Of course, you are supporting Steve Beshear which is a little better than Lunsford's endorsement of Jody Richards, and a hell of alot better than his eventual endorsement of Ernie Fletcher in 2003. I will consider Mr. Beshear, but like many of your supporters, feel unimpressed or disgusted with the rest of the Democratic field.

Again, I am left disillusioned. Don't make me root for Anne Northup!

Friday, May 04, 2007

That's it, I'm endorsing Bill Richardson for President

I've been leaning toward endorsing Bill Richardson for President for a couple of months now, and his latest remarks on immigration just cinched the deal. Here's a transcript of an older immigration speech from his governor's office that reports the same information with a bit more detail: Reform Speech from Bill Richardson

Here are the high points:

1. Secure the Border--Richardson supports doubling the number of border patrol agents, adding high tech security devices, and tearing down fences that don't work and send the wrong message.
2. Penalize Employers--He also supports raising the minimum wage and fining businesses that hire illegals.
3. Amnesty--He doesn't call it that, but admits that the term will be used against him. It's alot more complicated than that.
4. Work with the Mexican Government--Richardson realizes that there will always be a weak link in the chain of immigration reform unless the border is secured from both directions. He's already met with President Calderon as New Mexico governor.
5. Increase the number of Legal Immigrants--Just to accommodate the family members of current illegals who will become permanent legal residents, Richardson supports doubling the number of available family visas.

To me, these ideas are common sense. He lays them out articulately and with the wisdom afforded a public servant with his experience. I had not sought to endorse a candidate this early, but felt that it was necessary before Hillary sucked all of the oxygen out of the room. More on that later.

Sunday, April 29, 2007

Debate Rundown...

Okay. Here's the "down-and-dirty-I'm-up-at-1:15-in-the-morning-three-days-after-the-debate" rundown of how the candidates measured up.

First of all, let me say, I was not happy with this debate format. I hate group interviews that are called debates. This was a "speed forum" if nothing else. That being said, here ya go:

1. Hillary Clinton: Can this woman get any more fake? If I had never heard her speak and had no idea what she stood for, this performance would have made me her fan. As such, I give her the debate-winning prize. Her strong answer on the terrorist attack question and believable tone reminded me of her husband. Good going. (A)

2. Barack Obama: Who was this guy? Stick to the platitudes. They are your strong suit. Unfortunately, you are running for the Democratic Party nomination. If you don't get some policy points in your presentation before Labor Day, you'll be sunk. You said more words than anyone on stage, and yet you said nothing of substance. Down you go. (C-)

3. John Edwards: That $400 haircut looks just like your $50 haircut. Too bad that story got attention prior to the debate. I think alot of people were looking more at your hair than your platform. Overall, you gave very succinct answers that were heavy on policy. I like that. (B+)

4. Joe Biden: "Yes" was the best answer you gave all night. You dodged Mr. William's questions like a pro. I was particularly intrigued by your answer on the Virginia Tech shooting. Considering none of the gun laws you mentioned would have been useful in this case, what was your point? Thanks for complementing the Democratic field of candidates. Don't fawn over Hillary too much, though. (B-)

5. Bill Richardson: For experience, policy positions, and downright balls, you are my favorite candidate. However, you did yourself very few favors in this "debate." Did you have trouble hearing the questions? If not, were you constipated? Your answers were garbled and you looked uncomfortable. If I didn't like you so much, I'd give you a lower grade. (B-)

6. Chris Dodd: Stiff. Boring. At least you gave a creative answer on abortion and Justice John Roberts. (C+)

7. Dennis Kucinich: You have improved so much since 2004. Fmr. Sen. Gravel made you look almost sane. You earned a high grade, but your still just a bottom feeder used to make other candidates look more reasonable. (A-)

8. Mike Gravel: Dude! You like to scream, don't ya! I can't stand people who are too angry to make a convincing argument. (D)

Overall, a disappointing night for me. I can't stand Hillary Clinton, and yet, she did best everyone on tone and content. She probably just added to her already burgeoning lead in the polls. Everyone else gained a little name recognition and introduced themselves to primary voters. Hopefully the next debate will be more inspirational.

Wednesday, April 25, 2007

First Presidential Primary Debate of the Democratic Party Candidates

Airs tomorrow at 7pm Eastern/6 pm Central on MSNBC. All eight candidates will be there:

Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, John Edwards, Bill Richardson, Joe Biden, Chris Dodd, Dennis Kucinich, and Mike Gravel.

I'll be commenting on their "performances" sometime after the debate.

Monday, April 23, 2007

Virginia Tech and Gun Control

Since the horrible events at Virginia Tech occured, I have heard alot of Democrats and liberals calling for a renewed effort to pass gun control legislation.

Bad idea.

First of all, I'm not a big supporter of gun control. Personally, I believe you should fear a government that fears the people it represents. Yes, there are nut jobs out there who will use guns (even legally purchased ones) to commit horrible acts, but most of us are honest, law-abiding citizens. I don't even like guns, but I think every person should be allowed to carry one wherever they go, even on airplanes. Do you think there would have been a single highjacked plane on September 11th if 20 or 30 guns had suddenly appeared from passengers' jackets? (And for those of you worried about "cabin pressure." That myth was already busted. Watch the Discovery channel once-in-a-while.) If students and teachers at Virginia Tech had been "packing," it's possible that a dozen or more lives might have been spared.

Let's not have knee-jerk policy decisions based on horrifying and emotionally-charged events. That kind of action gets us things like the "Patriot Act." And that's not good for America.

Thursday, March 25, 2004

Liberals Unite! (but not right now)


Two important things are happening this year: The destruction of the Bush administration and the election of a Democratic President.


The first event must precede the second, but in order to do that, we need as many people/organizations going after G.W. as possible. So before you send your hard-earned money to John Kerry or the DNC, consider other organizations like Democracy for America or MoveOn.org. Do a google search and find a group of people who most closely follow your political philosophy and give donations to them. Republicans and conservatives have been doing this for decades, and we are just now playing catch up.


Consider the effect on the average undecided voter watching multiple television ads sponsored by different groups as opposed to the effect of one group or person sending a barrage of political messages to that individual's TV screen. I believe we will be more effective on the whole with this method. Continue to give to the candidate and the party, but reserve your more substantial contributions for your favorite groups. You will be much happier with your investment in the long run.


As a side note, I work for neither "Democracy for America" or "MoveOn.org" in any official capacity, although I do support both whole-heartedly.


Sunday, November 09, 2003

The Stars and Bars


Howard Dean is a man that shoots from the hip. He also tends to get shot in the ass. Let's clear up this whole "confederate flags on pickup trucks" issue.


First of all, they exist. I've seen them. In Kentucky, in Alabama, in Georgia, and in every southern state I've been to. Secondly, not all people who venerate the "stars and bars" are racists--no matter what Al Sharpton thinks. Thirdly, Howard Dean is dead on the money (even if he openned an old wound with his comments).


We need voters. These guys and gals are voters. We Dean supporters in the South are not going to concede a single vote in this election. Howard knows that, and that is why he said what he said. He is convinced, and he may be right, that social conservatives in the south have been voting with Republicans because they have been told it's in their best interest when it is obviously not.


Your kids are going to be taught about sex in school...Blacks and Hispanics will take your jobs...Abortion on demand will be the law...They're coming for your guns...The military will suffer...Your taxes will go up...We'll lose our sovereignty as a nation...They hate God...Gay marriage will destroy society...Government will just get bigger and more intrusive...


...All because you vote for a Democrat!


Howard Dean has hit on a nerve. Sure he's gonna hurt some feelings. Black people hate the Confederate flag because it represents the South's defense of slavery. Southerners hate being called out on an issue that is so close to their hearts--especially by a Yankee. But to ignore the issue and pretend it will go away is more irresponsible than taking a little political flak. It was Dean's willingness to concede the issue to his critics that got me upset, but certainly not enough to quit supporting him.


On a related note, John Edwards needs to spend more time in the South if he thinks that this statement offends a majority of Southerners. To borrow his attitude: "We don't need people like John Edwards telling the rest of the world what we Southerners think. Who died and made you President of the Southeast?" Bite me, John!


Monday, October 27, 2003

Kucinich's Blues


Representative Dennis Kucinich is feeling a little slighted, and he may have a good reason. Howard Dean is airing an ad in New Hampshire that, among other things, criticizes his Democratic opponents' support for the Iraq resolution in 2002. Kucinich feels that it is an unfair characterization of his position. So?


Half of New Hampshire doesn't know who the hell you are anyway. You haven't made any headway in the polls because of your all-or-none attitude about every issue. You haven't got the chance of a two-legged cat in a dog pound to get the Democratic nomination for President. AND you look funny (cheap shot), and your name sounds like something coming out of the mouth of somebody sneezing.


I wouldn't doubt that the person who wrote the ad (improvised?) forgot you were still running! These three "special" candidates have raised less money than Jenna Bush, and they have fewer supporters combined than people who saw "Gigli." Perhaps they should reconsider their "professional" goals. I happen to think all three of them have great ideas. I would even consider supporting Carol Mosley-Braun if I thought she had a real chance at beating George Bush, but it is past time for these well-meaning individuals to exit gracefully.

Sunday, September 28, 2003

Why Are You Still Here?


Not YOU!


Can somebody tell me why we still have 10 presidential candidates for the Democratic nomination? I have to say I love all of these guys, but they're really "stopping up" the debates and the press coverage.


Carol, we love you, but do us a favor and leave! It looks like the "men's only" sign might just have to stay on the White House for another four years. Nice try, though.


Dennis, we...well, we..., please go away! Your great mind and liberal fervor would be wasted in the White House. Stay where you are or run for a Senate seat. That could be good fun!?!


Al, Al, Al, Al. Mind if I call you Al? You are a spark, a ray of light in an otherwise "dark" field of candidates (if you'll excuse the irony). Perhaps you could be a speech writer for the eventual Democratic candidate. We can't afford to lose you altogether, but I'm afraid you're taking up too much time.


Bob, I don't think there's anything wrong with a VP candidacy. Maybe you don't either, but there you are. Every time I turn on the television, there you are. As one of the most likeable politicians in the country, you have managed to acheive one of the lowest likeability ratings in the group. Whether or not you have any money, you should bow out gracefully before you make a fool of yourself and ruin it for this ticket: Dean/Graham 2004!


Just think. If these four got out now, the remaining "debates" could potentially give up to 16 or 17 minutes of speaking time per candidate. Maybe we could move beyond one minute answers. After all, liberals and left-leaning moderates (and Joe) need more time to explain themselves than G.W. does. We normally don't see the world in black-and-white like he does. We can rarely give a "yes" or "no" answer to any question, yet with the field of candidates at 10, we have very little choice. For those of you who support one of these four candidates, it may be time for a little reality check. There are two things you can't survive a political contest without in this country: Money and voters. These four have little of either. They all have contributed so much to the process and have brought many issues to the forefront that might otherwise have been ignored, but I'm afraid it's time to say "goodbye."


Don't you even think about it, Hillary!

Thursday, September 25, 2003

The New York (Economic) Debate


Wow, what a show! I thought Dean was going to blow a gasket, and who could blame him. Almost every candidate on the stage was gunning for him. This should prove once and for all the formidable frontrunner that Dean has become. Now, I give you the traditional rundown of the debate.


10. Gen. Wesley Clark--Why didn't you just send a taped statement to the effect: "I'm not sure what I believe in or stand for, but I'll get back with you in a few weeks." We could have saved 6 minutes for more delicious Gephardt/Dean banter. Welcome to the "party!"


9. Dick Gephardt--For sinking to the lowest level yet. Howard Dean is not a "Gingrich" Republican, although the comparison could help him with the inaccurate "liberal" label.


8. Joe Lieberman--We just can't get enough of that Jewish wit and charm combined with a no-holds barred New England attitude...Oops, sorry I was watching a Woody Allen film just before the debate, my mistake.


7. John Kerry--For someone who WAS a frontrunner, your not acting very comfortable on stage. Perhaps you need a viagra?


6. Dennis Kucinich--I admire your moxie, but when are you going to start running for President instead of Wisconsin Governor?


5. Carol Moseley Braun--Easily the most classy person ever to run for President. You need a lot more passion and intensity if you want to get anywhere in this race.


4. Al Sharpton--I think they forgot you a couple of times, but that's nothing new. Your shifty, but your awfully funny.


3. Bob Graham--The most improved performance of the debate series. I saw passion and potential. Your setting yourself up as a terrific VP candidate should you lose the nomination.


2. Howard Dean--Aside from a few brief flashes, you controlled yourself very well in the face of attack. The way you deflected policy "flip-flops" was ingenious and unassailable. This is why we love you.


1. John Edwards--For reminding us to keep our eyes on the prize. You are positioning yourself as a potentially dangerous challenge for the other nine candidates. Thanks for not boring us with the whole "my father worked in a mill" spiel, by the way.