Saturday Night Mixed Bag

I'll tell you right now, there *is* no unifying theme for this post, except that these are all diaries or stories that I felt should get front page attention. If there's something you'd like me to add to the links here, just let me know in the comments and I'll try to update this post as I get the chance.

Tickets for Democracy Fest '06 are now available. Click here for more information.

A Comment Becomes a Diary by Militarytracy

The comment had been in response to the Pouring Herbicide on the Grassroots diary I excerpted a couple posts ago. This new diary by Militarytracy is about Kos and the Alito non-filibuster.

There's another diary at Booman called A Radical Call to Civil Disobedience! by Arminius. He posted in the Open Thread at Booman that I've been looking and looking for four days now, and aside from the little diary here, as far as I can tell this has attracted exactly ZERO attention in the left blogosphere. I'm really amazed how that could be.

I commented that his was one of those many diaries I'd been *meaning* to look at, but somehow hadn't quite gotten to it, and could he give me the "in a nutshell" summary of it. Here's what he told me:

Nutshell: Last December the House of Representatives passed an "immigration reform" bill that will make it a FELONY for any person to "assist" a person who is not in valid immigration status. That includes thousands of people who entered legally and have done everything possible to comply with the law and are technically out of status due to government errors and delays. The law would make it a felony for church groups, lawyers, and private citizens to help anybody who is out of status.

The U.S. Senate just started debate on the bill. It is considered to be quite likely that it will become law.

The Catholic Archbishop of Los Angeles just called on all Catholics, priests and lay people alike, to devote every day of Lent to opposing this legislation, and he called on them to actively disobey the law if it is enacted.

I definitely agree that the story deserves more attention, for many reasons, not the least of which is the fact that people in the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic church are often the object of criticism by many in the "liberal blogosphere". I feel that we should be just as willing to praise and support them when they do something we approve of.

Then there is this article at Democratic Underground called Good Neighbors.

The right-wing says that there is a "Liberal Agenda." This agenda is chock full of evil. Liberals want to make Christianity illegal, kill babies, abolish the military, and advance the other agenda--the oft-cited "homosexual agenda"--onto our nation's innocent and impressionable children.

Too often the left responds by saying, "There is no liberal agenda," and calling it quits.

But guess what campers--there is a liberal agenda. Oh yes, there really, really is.

The great liberal agenda, the object of the Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy, is to make life better for every individual in this country.

The Liberal Agenda is based on a truly simple concept, one that every American can understand with no interpretation whatsoever.

We're good neighbors.

Click for the rest.

Oh, and remember Bush thinking that attacking Iraq was his "mission from God"? Apparently Tony Blair has similar ideas about the whole thing being divinely blessed, according to this diary by Oui.

In the comments to this thread, Anne from Vermont pointed out this diary at Kos, VT Democrats to push Impeachment at the State Legislature. Vermont really does sound like a cool state. Too bad it's also such a *cold* state.

Alternate link for comments

Caption-o-rama

On the lighter side, you must check out this BBC News piece, In pictures: Bush, pumpkins and buffalo. Pictures 1, 2, and 3 cry out for captions.

I have decided not to include any of the photos in this post, so as not to offend the sensibilities of our regular readers, some of whom would be likely to have the same reaction to a Bush photo on this page as they would to a big, hairy spider on the dinner table. Ewww! Get it off! Get it OFF!

So, in lieu of a picture of Bush, please enjoy this picture of two baby otters, courtesy of Cute Overload.



Alternate link for comments

Pouring herbicide on the grassroots

I already linked to this in the comments, but would like to give it frontpage attention as well. Kahli (the author of this Booman Tribune diary) posted at BFA as "Franster".

I know the treatment Christine has received is not unique to her. The DLC and DCCC types are pouring herbicide on the grassroots in state after state. Kerry and Clinton are out raising money for Christine's anointed opponent. Why? Why is Casey the fair-haired child in Pennsylvania? Why does the Democratic Party fear us so much?

Could it be that they are more concerned with keeping their power rather than using it in a beneficial way? Could it be that they have forgotten what it means to take a principled stand? Could it be that they are just pissed as hell that we haven't kissed the rings (or their butts) and asked permission to be involved in politics?

I don't know. What I do know is that we are at a turning point and we need to stand up for the candidates we feel most passionate about. For me, Christine heads the list. No matter who it is for you, please take this seriously. The DLC would like to prove that we are nothing more than annoying gnats and that they can ignore us at will. Donate your time, your money, your talent to a good progressive candidate. This is our short term priority. After the primaries, we need to develop long-term strategy. Some groups such as PDA and DFA are already working hard to reform the Democratic Party. In the short term, though, do everything you make the great progressive candidates successful in their primaries. Do it for them. Do it for the grassroots. Do it for your country.

p.s. http://www.cegelisforcongress.com

Update: In response to a story at Buckeye State Blog, about Bob Fitrakis running as an Independent candidate for governor in Ohio, I shared the following action item. Sharing it here too because I think it's a good thing for the grassroots to be involved in...

I did not become aware that Fitrakis was running until someone pointed that out in response to my recent Kos diary about the vortex of evil that is Ken Blackwell.

Here's something on Fitrakis' site that I think deserves attention:
ACTION ALERT: Fitrakis Urges Pressure on Boards of Elections to Issue Voter IDs

Fitrakis urged citizens to place pressure on Boards of Elections to issue PHOTO VOTER IDS to the poor, and at nursing homes and college campuses, so that voters disenfranchised in the past will be able to cast their votes in November.

Alternate link for comments

Connectedness is our natural state

I'm sure Demetrius wasn't expecting this comment of his to be "frontpaged", but I thought it was worth highlighting. Plus, he's not home right now, and I am. Heh. --Renee

Roots of altruism show in babies' helping hands

By LAURAN NEERGAARD, AP Medical Writer Thu Mar 2, 4:16 PM ET

WASHINGTON - Oops, the scientist dropped his clothespin. Not to worry - a wobbly toddler raced to help, eagerly handing it back. The simple experiment shows the capacity for altruism emerges as early as 18 months of age.

Toddlers' endearing desire to help out actually signals fairly sophisticated brain development, and is a trait of interest to anthropologists trying to tease out the evolutionary roots of altruism and cooperation.

I think babies have to *learn* the concept of agency. Every memory they have early on is of perfect connectedness with those around them. Before birth they are warm and safe and nourished. They are (literally) connected to other people. After birth, they remain very connected - as is necessary for their very survival - to other people. (Mommy and I are one.) *Not* being one with a larger "community" is a new concept to learn. But, we learn it. And, I think the enlightened eventually try to *unlearn* it.

Alternate link for comments

Uniting for impact

Semi-related update (blog family business). Take a peek at the Blog Family Birthday Calendar to see how many birthdays are coming up. I know I'm going to need some help remembering. Also, check out the page with Our Intentions, and let me know if there are any additions you would like me to make. Finally, if you click the bumper stickers on the upper left hand side of this page, it will take you to this link. Just wanted to mention that I've added a couple things there recently, like links to the Disabled Americans for Democracy Cafe Press store, and also a link where you can buy Diana in northern VA's book.

Have you seen this?

"Blog pioneer maps political strategy for 2008"

The blog pioneer the article is about is Jerome Armstrong. For anyone who needs a quick filling-in about who he is...

Armstrong is an evangelist for Democratic Internet activism, the founder of the blog Mydd.com, an alumnus of the Howard Dean campaign, and the co-author of a new book called Crashing the Gate: Netroots, Grassroots, and the Rise of People-Powered Politics.

He coined the word "netroots" to describe a 21st century version of the grassroots, door-to-door, union-local politics that used to work so well for the Democrats in the last century.

I encourage people to read the whole post, as well as the comments, but in a nutshell, he's decided that Mark Warner is going to be his guy in 2008, and he, like Markos Moulitsas, is cool with what the party did to Paul Hackett.

So, as far as I can tell, both co-authors of "Crashing the Gate" were polite enough to close the gates behind them once they got in. They've *become* part of the establishment. What I'm trying to figure out is how the "little fish" bloggers can find an effective way to band together and have impact similar to that of Daily Kos...


...and to be enough of a presence and real, viable source of support so that future Paul Hacketts couldn't be so easily pressured out of races--knowing that they'd have us to turn to.

Daily Kos has become such an institution that many of the big name politicians now post diaries there. It has, for a lot of people, become synonymous with "Democratic blog". And the bigger it gets, the more "gravity", or pull it has, and the bigger it's *going* to get.

I certainly admire people who are pioneers, and appreciate their contributions. But more and more I realize these guys are not playing on the same team as me. So again, the question is, how do we unite with the people who *are* on our team in such a way that we can have a real impact.

**UPDATE: floridagal has a diary at Booman Tribune, An opinion about Crashing the Gate and the MSNBC article posted earlier and in it she references what she posted on this blog earlier this week about that book.

Alternate link for comments

Howard Dean on Hannity and Colmes, March 2

Colmes: We just had this tape of this teleconference where President Bush is being briefed on Katrina. You have Michael Brown there and you have Max Mayfield of the National Hurricane Center. And he's clearly being told "We don't know how bad this could get, but there's a possibility of a problem with the levies, and four days after Katrina hit, the president is saying "We had no idea that there could be a breach of the levies. How do you respond to that--how should Democrats react to this?

Dean: Well, I don't think it's a matter of how Democrats react to it, I think it's a matter of how the American public reacts to it. Anybody who wants to see this for themselves should go to our website, Democrats.org. You can see this tape--it's linked to the Democratic party's web site. And I advise Americans to do that, because I think they need to make up their own mind about about this. This president has a pattern of not being truthful to the American people about Iraq, about Katrina, about the Medicare prescription benefit--a long history of saying things that just aren't so.

Colmes: Let's talk about port security. You know, those who believe we should not have this deal go through are being of anti-Arab bias, as if we somehow don't want an Arab company or country to be involved in our ports. Is there anything to that?

Dean: I think there *is* something to that, I oppose the deal, but what I did, I told the Democratic National Committee we do not put out anything that has anything to do with the origins of the people who have this contract. I believe in general that it's a bad idear to outsource our port security, which is what the president's done. But it is not simply the United Arab Emirates that's part of this. This is a British company, Chinese companies own a couple of the ports on the west coast, Los Angeles and Long Beach. So, in general I think we need a national review about about whether we want to have foreign companies--(Colmes talks over him)

Colmes: But no American company bid on the ports, so maybe that's one of the problems. There was not a bidder--there was not an opportunity for an American company to be involved in this.

Dean: Well, I'm sure that an American company *would* bid on the ports if this was restricted to American companies, and I really do think that we can't outsource port security. You know, the president's outsourced most everything. But this is something you can't outsource. And one of the reason's we've gotten in trouble in Iraq, is we've outsourced our security to private firms. Abu Ghraib I think--the abuses in the prison in Iraq, was a product of contractors also in the chain of command, in terms of telling soldiers what to do and how to treat prisoners. The president seems to want to outsource our security and our military, and I think that's a very bad idear. Federal employees ought to be controlling the security of the United States, and I think that's why this is a bad idear. I think it's important for us to be sure that we don't allow anti-Arab bias. And I think that some of the statements on the right, particularly Senator Santorum, which I thought was appalling, are not necessary. We don't need to go down that road. But we do need to question who runs America's ports.

Colmes: You know the Republicans like to often go after you because of things you say, and they underscore some of the rhetoric that Howard Dean says. That seems to be a diversion from real issues, but do you feel you have to watch what you say sometimes so that that doesn't become the issue, and so that the focus can be on what the vision is for going forward.

Dean: No, I think I have to say more of what I say, and the reason is that the American people understand what I'm about. They understand that I want the truth, and honesty and openness in government, and that in fact is now a Democratic party position. In order for Democrats to win, we have to differentiate ourselves from Republicans. We have to stand up for what we believe in and show a clearly different path on issues like defending America, on issues like honesty in government, on issues like jobs, healthcare, and public education, and retirement security. That's exactly what we're now doing. In the 2006 congressional elections, Americans are going to see a very clear difference between Republicans and Democrats. And my job is to try to make sure we have that clear difference in the minds of the American people, so that they have a real choice in this next election.

Colmes: What would you predict in terms of House, Senate, how many seats will Democrats take--

Dean: Well, I'm not going to make specific predictions, but I'm going to tell you if we can clearly differentiate ourselves from Republicans, I believe we'll take back the House and Senate and the governorships. I think we're going to pick up 5 to 7 governorships. People are sick of this, they don't like being misled, they don't like the budget deficits, they think that Iraq is a mess, which it is, and I think that people want a real change in this country. And I think if the Democrats make it clear to the American people that we *will* bring change to America, that we'll win overwhelmingly.

Alternate link for comments

An opportunity for a netroots win

Remember yesterday morning, when I posted my dream about rescuing a cockatiel out of the toilet?

When I think about my own dreams, and what they might mean, I look to what's been on my mind recently. Well, that would have to be the Democratic party, and more specifically the Democratic party in Ohio.

But that's just silly. The Ohio Democratic Party isn't really *that* stupid, is it? That it would fly, intentionally, straight into the toilet?

Hmm. Well, if that's what the dream *was* about, I suppose it's noteworthy that I couldn't bear to just let it die. Especially not in *my* bathroom...

Well, I have been thinking about what positive steps could be taken to fish the party out of the toilet. Well, I've posted an updated version of that at Booman and My Left Wing, and ended with an action item...

So, (and here's the action item part) how *do* we rescue the Ohio Democratic Party? If you think it doesn't *need* to be rescued, or that there is no hope for rescue, then this discussion probably won't be of interest to you.

Like a number of people have already expressed, there is nothing to be gained by continually rehashing the Hackett/Brown debacle. So, what is a positive place to put our energy? Again and again, I have heard from people who have great things to say about Subodh Chadra, a candidate for Attorney General in Ohio, yet the Ohio Democratic Party has endorsed Marc Dann. They have updated their web site to show the slate of endorsed candidates in their sidebar.

This is someone who Paul Hackett described, in his interview with Ohio 2nd, as worthy candidate who was not getting party support because he was perceived in some ways as an "outsider". And, by golly, given the endorsements that took place not too long ago, it sure looks like Paul was right about that.

I see this as an opportunity to take positive steps toward transforming the party in Ohio. Subodh is not getting support from the party, but has chosen to stay in the race. If he is to succeed, it will require a broad, concerted effort from the grassroots.

Who's with me? And how do we make this happen?

For starters, I would appreciate it if you would recommend the diaries I linked above. Also, check out these two posts at Buckeye State Blog (which has, by the way, recently added a button in support of Chandra).
We Seriously Gotta Elect This Guy!
Score One For The Good Guys!

And check out his campaign web site here. (Note: Of course, now that I've written up this post, that site seems to be down or very slow at the moment. I recommend reading the two posts at Buckeye State Blog now, and trying Subodh Chandra's site a little later on.)

Alternate link for comments

Blackwell fails to keep data secure, blames victims

Crossposted at Daily Kos and Booman Tribune.

I first encountered this story in the Buckeye State Blog yesterday (stories here and here), and saw an update today via Plunderbund.

Quoting an article in The Columbus Dispatch, Eric at Plunderbund posts:

A link on the government Web site of Ohio Secretary of State J. Kenneth Blackwell contains hundreds of Social Security numbers and birth dates on public documents stored there.

The personal data are listed on nationally standardized forms submitted by citizens and corporations could be mined by any identity thief with Internet access.

I saw this part of the story yesterday, along with the recounting of the fact that Democratic gubernatorial candidate Brian Flannery was one of the individuals whose Social Security number was accessible via the Secretary of State's web site, and that he *was* the victim of identity theft. Today, in the Dispatch article, we see the woefully inadequate response from Blackwell's office:

Because the forms are public documents, the secretary's office is bound by law to display them as submitted and cannot redact any of the information, Blackwell spokesman James Lee said last night.

"We may not alter it in any way." Lee said.

But Ohioans should know that Social Security numbers are not required when using that particular form in this state, Lee said.

Nice. As Eric writes, Again, wish I were kidding. So it's the citizen's fault you don't seek to protect their private data? [buzzer sound] Wrong answer!

Lots of forms still ask for that information, and, when people are in "form-filling-out mode", they aren't necessarily thinking, "Hey, wait a minute--they aren't supposed to ask me this! I don't have to give them my Social Security number." I'm sure some people out there are still not aware of this rule, but even those who are, may obligingly fill it out anyway, because an official form asks for it.

The onus of responsibility, in my mind, is on the Secretary of State's office, to make sure that this information is secure. But Ken Blackwell has shown time and time again that he is not interested in safeguarding the well-being of Ohioans.

Alternate link for comments

Update: 'The Situation Room' Transcript

This is the transcript of the expanded interview with Howard. --Ed.

In order to be sensitive to copyright issues, I have edited this transcript so that we are excerpting the complete transcript that is available here. -Renee


BLITZER: And joining us now is the chairman of the Democratic Party, the former governor of the Vermont, Howard Dean. Governor, thanks very much for joining us.

HOWARD DEAN, DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN: Thanks for having me on, Wolf.

BLITZER: Let's talk several subjects. Ports first. The Dubai port deal, specifically. The president says this represents no threat to U.S. national security. Listen to what he said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BUSH: Let me make something clear to the American people. If there was any doubt in my mind or people in my administration's mind that our ports would be less secure and the American people endangered, this deal wouldn't go forward.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: Do you believe him?

DEAN: I think there's probably no doubt in his mind. The problem is, he hasn't gotten the information from his own administration. The Coast Guard raised the issue shortly before this deal was done and said, "We can't guarantee security here." So once again, the president doesn't seem to be in touch with folks who are in his own administration who are telling him something, and he's doing the opposite.

BLITZER: He acknowledges that he wasn't informed as the committee, the interagency committee, was reviewing it. But since then, he has been briefed on what's going on. In fact, the Coast Guard now, the admiral who's in charge of port security, was here in THE SITUATION ROOM yesterday. And despite some earlier misgiving, they say they have been reassured. Listen to this exchange with Rear Admiral Craig Bone. Listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: Can assure the American public that the threat level will not increase as a result of this Dubai firm taking over the British firm's operations?

REAR ADM. CRAIG BONE, COAST GUARD: Yes, I can tell you that the measures that we put into place will assure that.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: And he's a professional. He's not a political operative or anything. He's the guy in charge of port security for the Coast Guard.

DEAN: Here's my concern about this, Wolf. First of all, I'm not sure that any foreign company-controlled government (sic) ought to be -- government-controlled foreign entity ought to be controlling our ports. The Chinese government controls Long Beach in Los Angeles. I don't think that's a good idea. I don't ...

BLITZER: Eighty percent of the port operations in the United States are controlled by foreign companies.

DEAN: Yeah, but you know what? The ports aren't secure. The ports are not secure.

BLITZER: But that's the responsibility of the Coast Guard, the Customs Agency. The U.S. government is supposed to be in charge of security. They just handle the cargo.

DEAN: Well, there's another issue we're going to come to in a minute. But in terms of the safety, why would we let a foreign government control our access to our ports?

BLITZER: This has been going on for the past 20 or 30 years. The U.S. has basically stopped operating the ports and outsourced it to foreign companies.

DEAN: But that might not be such a good thing. For example, who is checking on the containers that are coming into this country? We know that 95 percent of them come in uninspected. Who is -- you know, who's checking on ...

BLITZER: The government's supposed to do that.

DEAN: Yes, they are supposed to do that. They're a miserable failure. We have not been -- the ports have not been secured since this administration sort of supposedly cranked everybody up on 9/11.

Here's the other point. In the case of Dubai, I believe that the United Arab Emirates is an ally in the war on terror for most of the time. But the fact is, this company boycotts one of our most important allies, which is Israel.
...
DEAN: I'm not looking to hold Dubai to a different standard than any other country. I simply question whether we ought to be outsourcing our own security. That's what this is. We do not have control over our ports. I did not know that a British company controlled our ports. I did not know until I was on the West Coast week that a Chinese company controlled access to Long Beach in Los Angeles. I don't think that's a good idea.

I think we ought to -- look, globalization is all great and all that stuff. Globalization of our security -- you know, our security is our country's security. It seems to me that the basic bottom line is here that we probably ought not to be outsourcing our security in our ports.
...
DICK CHENEY, VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Some have suggested this war is not winnable, and a few seem almost eager to conclude that the struggle is already lost. They are wrong. The only way to lose this fight is to quit, and quitting is not an option.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: I said he seemed to be taking direct aim at you because you had been quoted as saying the war was not winnable.

DEAN: Well, I don't think the war is winnable under this leadership. This is a leadership that has made the biggest mess, not just of this war, but of our security in general. Here we are, five years into the presidency of George W. Bush. The North Koreans still have nuclear weapons, the Iranians are about to get them. Our troops are sent into battle without adequate body armor. Our ports are not secure, and now we find that they're being run under the jurisdiction of other countries.

What is this administration? Karl Rove thinks that security is going to be the issue? It's going to be the issue, all right. It's going to be the issue that elects Democrats. These people cannot figure out how to defend America in a reasonable way. And I think the American people are sick of this. And you've seen the polls as well as I have.

BLITZER: The Democratic Party, though, seems to be all over the place, from John Murtha saying a phased withdrawal is important, to Joe Lieberman, who said the other day this: "In my opinion, we are better off with Saddam Hussein gone, and we now have an opportunity to build within Iraq a self-governing, modernizing country that will really provide an alternative in the Arab world to the hatred and suicidal death that al Qaeda offers." The Democrats don't speak with one voice by any means.

DEAN: You're always going to get some outliers. I think everybody would agree that we're better off that Saddam has gone, but certainly not safer. But Joe is out there, with supporting the president. I think most Democrats -- and Chuck Hagel sometimes supports us. You're always going to get a few people in each party that are with the other side, and that's fine.

The truth is, there is something approaching consensus in the Democratic side. There's not a lot of difference between Joe Biden and Jack Murtha. There may be some difference on timing, but the -- we know we have to leave Iraq. We know we can't stay there. We know this president's idea of staying there forever or whatever it was that Dick Cheney said -- we've heard that in Vietnam. We're not going to make the same mistake twice.

The truth of the matter is, you cannot have a permanent commitment to a failed strategy. This president never had a strategy to win in Iraq.

Let me remind you and the audience: Donald Rumsfeld's testimony before the Congress that said the Iraqi oil was going to pay for all this -- here we are, $400 billion added to our deficit, because that wasn't true; that General Shinseki testified that we needed more troops, but this administration ignored him.

These folks did not know what they were getting into. They did not think about it. We're in it now. We've got to make the best of it. But we do not need to make our brave troops sitting ducks, which is what the president of the United States has done.
...
BLITZER: A lot of Democratic strategists, though, feel frustrated that the Democrats have not been able to capitalize on the failures that they perceive of this administration. Barack Obama, Democratic senator from Illinois: "We have been in a reactive posture for too long. I think we have been very good at saying no, but not good enough at saying yes."

DEAN: I await the positive message from the Hill. I absolutely agree with that. But I actually that in -- although, in all due respect to Senator Obama, who I am a huge fan of -- we are getting it together with a message. Our message is very clear.

We want honesty and integrity back in our government again. We want a national security -- a tough, strong national security policy, but one that relies on telling the truth to our citizens, our soldiers and our allies. We want a health care system that works for everybody, like 36 other countries have. We want American jobs that will stay in America, using energy independence as a new industry to generate them. And we want a strong public education system to give us opportunity and optimism back in America. I think that's a good place to start.

BLITZER: We're out of time, but a couple little political questions while I have you. Cash on hand for the Democratic Party as of January 1st, 2006: $5.5 million for the DNC; $34 million for the RNC. What happened to all that Democratic money?

DEAN: We're rebuilding the party. We've raised 20 percent more than we ever have before in an off year. We've got 200 operatives right now in every state in the country. And we've won four special elections in a row in Mississippi, seven out of eight in New Hampshire. First African-American mayor in Mobile, Alabama. We now have the mayorship in the largest county -- a million people -- in Utah. We're starting to win in states that used to be core Republican states.

If you want to build this party, you've got to invest the money to do it, and that's what I'm doing.

BLITZER: Senator Clinton of New York says Karl Rove, the deputy White House chief of staff, is obsessed with her. Do you think he is?

DEAN: I have no idea. I try to stay away from Karl Rove's thinking. It's gotten the president in a lot of trouble, and so I don't have any comment on what Karl Rove has to say.
...
BLITZER: Governor Dean, thanks for coming in to THE SITUATION ROOM.

DEAN: Thank you. It was my pleasure.

Oh no, Howard, it's all ours. --Mgt.

Alternate link to comment

Go to bat for Christine Cegelis

From Christine Cegelis' campaign web site:

At midnight tonight (March 1st), the Federal Elections Commission will close the books on every penny, nickel, dime, and dollar that our campaign has raised in the past 60 days. When the politicians and media look at those numbers, they'll judge whether they think we can win.

This campaign has never been about $ signs. It's been about you, the people. What you and I believe. What you and I want to change. What's within our grasp to do.

But, until we can change the mindset of the "judges" and re-establish the power of the people, those "numbers" are crucial.

In these final hours, please consider making a contribution of whatever you can afford so that someone other than you can't try to stop us when, with your help, we've never been stronger.

And, if you're planning to donate to Christine, you can give through the Howard-Empowered Act Blue page so that she'll know that it came from Dean people.

Alternate link for comments

Situation Room Transcript

This is a transcript of what was aired earlier this afternoon. A more complete transcript will be posted later. ---Ed.

BLITZER: Jack, thanks very much. We'll get back to you soon. Coming up, a Texas showdown at the U.S. Supreme Court. Political battlelines are at stake and possibly much, much more. We're going to tell you what's happening right now.

Also ahead, my interview with Democratic Party Chairman Howard Dean. Is he fighting mad about the Dubai Port deal and the situation in Iraq?

....

BLITZER: Democrats are eager to put their days as a largely powerless party behind them, so party leaders are seizing on the Bush administration's vulnerable points, including the port security controversy and the escalating violence in Iraq.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BLITZER: And joining us now is the chairman of the Democratic Party, the former governor of Vermont, Howard Dean. Governor, thanks very much for joining us.

HOWARD DEAN, CHMN. DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL CMTE.: Thanks for having me on, Wolf.

BLITZER: Let's talk several subjects: ports first -- the Dubai port deal, specifically. The president says this represents no threat to U.S. national security. Listen to what he said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BUSH: Let me just make something clear to the American people. If there was any doubt in my mind or people in my administration's mind that our ports would be less secure and the American people endangered, this deal wouldn't go forward.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: Do you believe him?

DEAN: I think there's probably no doubt in his mind. The problem is, he hasn't gotten the information from his own administration. The Coast Guard raised the issue shortly before this deal was done, and said we can't guarantee the security here. So once again, the president doesn't seem to be in touch with folks in his own administration, who are telling him something and he's ignoring the -- he's doing the opposite.

BLITZER: He acknowledges that he wasn't informed as the committee -- the interagency committee -- was reviewing it, but since then, he has been briefed on what's going on. In fact, the Coast Guard now -- the admiral who's in charge of port security was here in THE SITUATION ROOM yesterday -- and despite some earlier misgivings, they say they have been reassured. Listen to this exchange I had with Rear Admiral Craig Bone. Listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: Can you assure the American public that the threat level will not increase as a result of this Dubai firm taking over the British firm's operations?

RADM. CRAIG BONE, U.S. COAST GUARD: Yes. I can tell you that the measures that we've put into place will assure that.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: All right. He's a professional, he's not a political operative or anything.

DEAN: Well, yes, we know.

BLITZER: He's the guy in charge of port security for the Coast Guard.

DEAN: Here's my concern about this, Wolf: first of all, I'm not sure that any foreign company-controlled government (sic) ought to be -- government-controlled foreign entity ought to be controlling our ports. The Chinese government controls Long Beach in Los Angeles. I don't think that's a good idea. I don't ...

BLITZER: Eighty percent of the port operations in the United States are controlled by foreign companies.

DEAN: Yes, but you know what? The ports aren't secure. The ports are not secure.

BLITZER: But that's the responsibility of the Coast Guard, the Customs Agency. The U.S. government is supposed to be in charge of security. They just handle the cargo, if you will.

DEAN: Well, there's another issue we're going to come to in a minute. But in terms of the safety, why would we let a foreign government control our access to our ports?

BLITZER: This has been going on for the past 20 or 30 years. The U.S. has basically stopped operating the ports and outsourced it to foreign companies.

DEAN: Yes, but that might not be such a good thing. For example, who is checking on the containers that are coming into this country? We know that 95 percent of them come in uninspected. Who is -- you know, who's checking on ...

BLITZER: The government's supposed to do that.

DEAN: Yes, they are supposed to do that. They're a miserable failure.

BLITZER: Let's talk about the war in Iraq right now. Listen to what the vice president, Dick Cheney, said yesterday, because he seemed to be taking direct aim at you. Listen to this.

DEAN: I doubt it, but ...

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DICK CHENEY, VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Some have suggested this war is not winnable, and a few seem almost eager to conclude that the struggle is already lost. They are wrong. The only way to lose this fight is to quit, and quitting is not an option.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: I said he seemed to be taking direct aim at you because you had been quoted as saying the war was not winnable.

DEAN: Well, I don't think the war is winnable under this leadership. This is a leadership that has made the biggest mess, not just of this war, but of our security in general.

Here we are, five years into the presidency of George W. Bush. The North Koreans still have nuclear weapons, the Iranians are about to get them. Our troops are sent into battle without adequate body armor. Our ports are not secure, and now we find that they're being run under the jurisdiction of other countries.

What is this administration? Karl Rove thinks that security is going to be the issue? It's going to be the issue, all right. It's going to be the issue that elects Democrats.

These people cannot figure out how to defend America in a reasonable way. And I think the American people are sick of this. And you've seen the polls as well as I have.

BLITZER: The Democratic Party, though, seems to be all over the place, from John Murtha saying a phased withdrawal is important, to Joe Lieberman, who said the other day this: "In my opinion, we are better off with Saddam Hussein gone, and we now have an opportunity to build within Iraq a self-governing, modernizing country that will really provide an alternative in the Arab world to the hatred and suicidal death that al Qaeda offers." So the Democrats don't speak with one voice by any means.

DEAN: Well, you're always going to get some outliers. I think everybody would agree that we're better off that Saddam has gone, but certainly not safer. But Joe is out there, with supporting the president.

I think most Democrats -- and Chuck Hagel sometimes supports us. You're always going to get a few people in each party that are with the other side, and that's fine. The truth is, there is something approaching consensus on the Democratic side. There's not a lot of difference between Joe Biden and Jack Murtha. There may be some difference on timing, but the -- we know we have to leave Iraq. We know we can't stay there. We know this president's idea of staying there forever or whatever it was that Dick Cheney said -- we've heard that in Vietnam. We're not going to make the same mistake twice.

BLITZER: A couple little political questions while I have you. Cash on hand for the Democratic Party as of January 1st, 2006: $5.5 million for the DNC; $34 million for the RNC. What happened to all that Democratic money?

DEAN: We're rebuilding the party. We've raised 20 percent more than we ever have before in an off year. We've got 200 operatives right now in every state in the country. And we've won four special elections in a row in Mississippi, seven out of eight in New Hampshire, first African-American mayor in Mobile, Alabama.

We now have the mayorship in the largest county -- a million people -- in Utah. We're starting to win in states that used to be core Republican states. If you want to build this party, you've got to invest the money to do it, and that's what I'm doing.

BLITZER: Senator Clinton of New York says Karl Rove, the deputy White House chief of staff, is obsessed with her. Do you think he is?

DEAN: I have no idea. I try to stay away from Karl Rove's thinking. It's gotten the president in a lot of trouble, and so I don't have any comment on what Karl Rove has to say.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BLITZER: And you can see my entire interview with the DNC chairman Howard Dean in the 7:00 p.m. Eastern hour here in THE SITUATION ROOM.

Alternate link to comment

Happy Birthday, Harry Belafonte

Thank you to Maryscott O'Connor at My Left Wing for tipping me off that today is Harry Belafonte's birthday. I had no idea today was his birthday when I found the following story this morning.

Bush pressured King family to disinvite Belafonte

Belafonte told reporters before a speech at Case Western Reserve University that President Bush influenced the King family to disinvite him from the funeral in suburban Atlanta on Feb. 7.

Belafonte, known to be a friend of Martin Luther King Jr., said he was told about the decision the day before the funeral, at which he had been scheduled to speak.

The King children made the final decision, Belafonte said, but they were "fiercely intimidated by the president's representatives."

Belafonte has been a vocal critic of the Bush administration.

I guess Bush didn't want him there because he's been known to say things like this:

"President George W. Bush lied to the people of this nation, distorted the truth, declared war on a nation who had not attacked us . . . put Americas sons and daughters in harm's way . . . and destroyed the lives of tens of thousands of [Iraqi] women and children who had nothing to do with it. It was an act of terror."

You can see video of Belafonte speaking at the Black State of the Union here.

Update--and since I can't think of Harry Belefonte without getting the "Banana Boat Song" in my head, here's an article about it, with a link to an MP3 of the song.

Alternate link for comments

Rescuing a half-dead cockatiel from the toilet (a metaphor)

It's been a long time since I've had a dream that I could remember clearly, and that stayed with me long enough that I could think about it. A quick Google search informed me that the last time it happened was May 2005, when I had a rather jarring dream about a baby tiger. This one didn't pack nearly the same emotional punch, but I do remember it, and you might find it mildly amusing if there's nothing good on television.

Now that I think about it, most of the weird dreams that stand out in my memory have animals in them. I suppose that makes sense, because I have always loved animals, and they manage to tug at my heart strings and gain my sympathy, even if they are behaving in a way that is, well, downright stupid.

My dream last night was about a stupid little cockatiel. We had cockatiels as pets many years ago, before we had children. That's another theme with some of these odd dreams I remember--they often feature an animal I haven't had as a pet in a long time.

In last night's dream, a cockatiel flew (from where, I have no idea) into my bathroom and straight into the toilet. There it was, head down in that little hole, wet rump protruding. Not moving. It seemed like it could be dead, but it was also seemed like it couldn't have died so quickly.

Now what? No one is home but me, and there's a possibly dead cockatiel in my toilet. It's not getting out of there on its own, that's for sure. But it might be dead (ick) and it's (have I mentioned this?) in the toilet. Ick, ick. Realizing I really have no other choice, I plunge my hand into the water, grab the soggy bird, and drop him into the empty bathtub. At first, he doesn't move. Then I poke him, or something, and he starts to stir.

Okay, good, he's alive. Now what? I'd like to be able to wash him or something, given where he's been, but I'm not sure how to do that, or what he can handle given his recent brush with death. My mom comes up to me ('cause it's a dream, and therefore I'm still living at home) and asks what's going on. I remember her in the dream asking incredulously, "He flew *into* the toilet?!" Yep. Not a very smart birdie, huh?

But what do I do with him. Because it's a dream, in addition to still living at home, I at the same time have my current family and all of our pets, so taking in another is not an option. So I try to figure out who I can call about this bird.

That point is where I woke up. The first thing I became aware of was the feeling that something was "perched" on my right shoulder. Yeah, right. I turned, and discovered that Demetrius had rolled over in his sleep in such a way that his fingertips were resting lightly on my shoulder. Ah. That would explain it--I was aware of this sensation, but I was asleep, so my unconscious mind knitted together a story around it.

When I think about my own dreams, and what they might mean, I look to what's been on my mind recently. Well, that would have to be the Democratic party, and more specifically the Democratic party in Ohio.

But that's just silly. The Ohio Democratic Party isn't really *that* stupid, is it? That it would fly, intentionally, straight into the toilet?

Hmm. Well, if that's what the dream *was* about, I suppose it's noteworthy that I couldn't bear to just let it die. Especially not in *my* bathroom...

Alternate link for comments

Some memories of Iowa in Crashing the Gate.

I am reading Crashing the Gate. Pretty good book. I think it will help me regain my focus. Right now I am reading selected portions. A lot of it I knew, but a few parts slapped me in the face. I try to dwell on the future of the party and bringing change, but now and then I allow myself a look back.

In one of the DLC's monthly staff meeting, From explained his fears of a Dean candidacy----his angry tone, his borrowing of the Wellstone rhetoric, his "weakness" on national security issues and his opposition to the brewing Iraq War. From believed that Dean's use of Wellstone's "Democratic wing of the Democratic Party" line was directly aimed at Clinton's centrist policies and therefore at the DLC. From took it as a personal affront, saying that "Dean would undo everything that Clinton had stood for" and put the Democratic Party permanently back into minority status......At one point, the normally reserved From pounded the table and said that "the DLC was there to protect the Democratic Party from itself"--said a source who was present.

And this part after Iowa makes me ill. I had heard rumors of this, but just reading the words is awful. This is speaking of a party at the DLC after the Iowa Caucuses.

At the DLC, the day after the Iowa caucus was a joyous one. At a pizza party celebration, Bruce Reed and Will Marshall were giddy with excitement. So giddy in fact, a partygoer informed us, "they engaged in the dorkiest high-five ever, and an effort toward a chest bump. It was sad." Snips from pages 142, 143, 145

I don't think this type of stuff should be forgotten or brushed under the rug forever. If we are to change things we need to remember to an extent and confront the old anger. At least I need to do that, I think.

Anyway, he's back. We're still around. I could say no harm done, but that would not be true. The harm was in Al From's arrogance, and in the attempted "chest bump" of Marshall and Reed. They did not win, they lost. We won more than they even realize today. It will take a long time to get there, but the goal of taking back this party from those "dorks" is well worth it.



Alternate link for comments

Dean: Weakest Admin on Defense in Many, Many Years

Democrats.org has a post called ""The Weakest Adminstration on Defense We Have Seen in Many, Many Years"" that's worth checking out (for your daily dose of Howard)

(From a speech given by Governor Dean earlier today at the the Annual Conference of the Jewish Council for Public Affairs. -- Tim) "Karl Rove says that the Republicans are going to win on the issue of defense. I submit to you that if the issue is defense, the Republicans will lose because this is the weakest Administration on defense that we've seen in many, many years. What I mean is this. For five years this President has been in the White House. For five years North Korea continues to possess nuclear weapons. For five years this Administration has been in the White House, Iran moves closer every day to producing nuclear weapons. For four years, Osama Bin Laden has been on the loose and remains so. And today we see the specter, as reported in the Jerusalem post- of a company that is about to take over American ports, which actively continues today to boycott Israel.

Click here for more.

Alternate link for comments

Fences still need mending

Update: Plunderbund has audio of Sherrod Brown on Air America

Paul Hackett has an op ed in the Philadelphia Inquirer: Culture of careerism scuttled a political bid, which is getting some attention around the blogs.

Today I saw these two posts on Ohio blogs:
What Sherrod Can Do: Suggestions for Rebuilding the Kwai Bridge by Psychobilly Democrat

Sherrod Brown: Just Give Me A Reason by Eric at Plunderbund

What follows here are excerpts from an article about how "bloggers ruined Sherrod Brown's month". Initially I posted this in the comments, but given that there still clearly are hard feelings which the Ohio Democratic Party is ignoring, and which some bloggers at Daily Kos (and most likely elsewhere as well) feel are best dealt with by browbeating those who don't "fall in line", I've decided this should be front-paged. It's the only acknowledgement that *I've* seen in the media that Sherrod Brown really does need to do some genuine fence-mending. Plunderbund has a pdf of the whole article here.

The article is from The Other Paper, one of our local newsweeklies, but only some of their articles are available in the online edition. The cover story, available online (but they replace the stories every week, so the link won't work next tomorrow) is about the Bad Man who wants to be governor of Ohio.

It must occasionally occur to the folks at the Ohio Democratic Party that things would be a lot easier if only Al Gore had never invented the Internet.

Sure, there would still be folks upset about Paul Hackett's withdrawal from the U.S. Senate race, but their collective despair wouldn't be endlessly feeding itself on the pages of Democratic blogs.

While the state party is trying to get folks excited about beating Mike DeWine, the anguish of disappointed Hackettheads is chronicled on an hourly basis."

Hackettheads? I bet columnist Dan Williamson made that one up minutes before his article went to print.

And the mood among Democrats following the Senate race is rather sour.

Buckeye Senate, perhaps the best read liberal political blog in the state, has kept up a continuous assault on the Democratic Party apparatus ever since Hackett's Feb. 14 withdrawal.

Bloggers dubbed that day--when Hackett formally left the Senate race and Democratic state Sen. Eric Fingerhut abandoned his campaign for governor--the "Valentine's Day Massacre," a term that quickly caught on nationwide.

Meanwhile, other bloggers, picking up on a Mother Jones story, accused the state and national Democratic Party of trying to "swiftboat" Hackett by spreading false rumors about his military service in Iraq."

With this din in the background, the state Democratic Party must try to get voters enthused about Sherrod Brown.

"Brown, a congressman from suburban Cleveland, is now guaranteed the Democratic nomination to face off against DeWine, the Republican incumbent, in the fall. Though he has statewide name ID and a respectable campaign bank account, Democratic bloggers exhibit as much excitement about Brown's candidacy as they would a plate of Brussels sprouts.

Chris Redfern, the state party chairman, acknowledged hard feelings over Hackett's exit could present a "short-term" challenge and that "there's healing to be done."

But some of Hackett's supporters seem to already have given up on the Senate race.

Democratic bloggers this week made note of the new Rasmussen poll, which indicated the fallout over Hackett's withdrawal had significantly damaged Brown's chances against DeWine."

Redfern said the Ohio party didn't pressure Hackett, but bloggers--many of whom were opposed to Redfern's selection as party chairman in December--aren't sure they believe him, and they're nowhere near close to dropping the subject.

"There's an underlying current in the blogosphere that these establishment Dems are just trying to railroad everybody," said Delaware resident Eric Vessels, who runs a site called Plunderbund, which gets 400 to 500 different visitors a day and coined the "Valentine's Day Massacre" phrase.

Of course, politics is a rough business, and it's fair to ask why they don't move on.

The first answer to that question is they really loved Hackett.

"I think a lot of bloggers feel like this was our guy," said Vessels.

The second answer is that Brown has never gotten along with bloggers.

"I don't know why they write what they write," Brown said earlier this year when asked about blogs' disaffection with him.

But Vessels said it's Brown's own fault. He said many bloggers, who agree with Brown's liberal politics, wanted to like him.

"The route that Sherrod Brown took was very dismissive of blogs," Vessels said. "Extremely dismissive of blogs."

That's understandable. Brown probably wondered why a prominent congressman should spend his valuable time appeasing folks who sit at their computers for hours typing about politics.

But he probably doesn't wonder anymore.

One more thing--check out Ohio 2nd's post, A Proposal, about finding a way to bury the hatchet, but not in anyone's head. Check out his suggestion, and weigh in if you have thoughts on this.


Alternate link for comments

Happy Mardi Gras

jc.s NOLA Lives blog has some Mardi Gras links, and this morning I found this article in Yahoo News.

Residents remain committed to New Orleans

It describes the hardships, but also includes this positive note:

New Orleanians are in the midst of their favorite time of year, Mardi Gras, and the crowds have been as thick as ever along the parade route as the party reaches its climax on Fat Tuesday. Paradegoers hold up handwritten signs thanking the krewes - the private clubs that stage and pay for the parades.

Alternate link for comments

We Believe! Ohio

Update: The printable PDF of Rev. Ahrens letter can be found here.

Crossposted at Faithful Ohio

Today I had the opportunity to meet with Rev. Tim Ahrens, pastor of First Congregational Church in downtown Columbus. He is the one who, as is described in this article in the Columbus Dispatch, sent a letter to dozens of pastors in central Ohio, with the intent of starting a dialog about how people of faith who care about a broad range of "values" issues can begin to make themselves heard. Something I already knew when I sat down with Tim, and that he emphasized in our meeting, is that this is not a "liberal" or "progressive" group, but rather a broad coalition of religious leaders and people of faith who agree that the message of prominent religious leaders like Rod Parsley and Russell Johnson does not speak for them:

"It centers in a few issues and on a few people, and it takes the nuances out of the debate around those issues and turns them into black-and-white issues," Ahrens said last week. "Some of those issues are questions about homosexuality, abortion and a definition of Muslims that is condescending and judgmental. Those are the issues that have been posited as the issues for Christians, but there are many of us who know that Jesus had a lot more to say about stewardship for the poor, about orphans and widows and others in need.

"We are, in a sense, saying that the Jesus being portrayed is not the Jesus we know and love and follow."

One of the most important things to do now, Rev. Ahrens said, is, like those tiny people on the dust speck in Horton Hears a Who, say "We are here!"

If you agree that it is important to help make sure that the dialog about values is more diverse and inclusive, please help spread the word about the new group, We Believe! and the upcoming press conference.

February 25, 2006

Dear Brothers and Sisters in Faith,

Since November 2005, a group of over 100 pastors, priests, rabbis, cantors and actively committed lay leaders from Roman Catholism, two traditions of Judaism, and 15+ Protestant denominations have met to discuss what we as people of faith can say as one voice speaking on behalf of the poor and on behalf of those who have a wide-ranging viewpoint on the intersection of faith and public policy.

We are black and white. We are men and women. We come from a wide range of theological diversity as well. We are conservative, moderate and liberal on the spectrum of faith and public policy! We serve urban, suburban and rural people in our houses of worship. We hold in common a deep and abiding love of the God whom we serve.

We also share in common our strong belief that we must act and speak in public ways to support the poor, the children and those who are voiceless and unrepresented in our times. We will speak with love to power as we serve God in these times.

Our name is WE BELIEVE!.

We are ready to launch our group (as ready as we ever will be). We want you to be a part of this launch.

On Tuesday, March 14, at 11:00am we will hold our first press conference. We are gathering at 10:30am at Pastor Vincent T. Frosh's church, The First AME Zion Church, 893 Bryden Road. We will gather there to pray together and prepare for our common unveiling of purpose.

We are planning for the presence of 150 people of faith at this public launch. We hope you are one of those people! We also hope that you bring 4-5 others with you. If you are a clergy person, bring other colleagues. If you are a lay person - come as a local leader - and bring your priest, pastor, deacon, elder, rabbi, cantor or imam.

Contact Rev. Tim Ahrens if you are coming - call Tim at 228-1741, ext. 13. or email at tim@first-church.org.

In closing, we ask you to do three more things:

1) Read our statement and our action steps below. If you can abide in these things, join us.

2) Pass this email on to others.

3) As you do this, please know that over the past 100 days, WE BELIEVE has evolved. With our greatest attendance at 65 leaders, we have sung together and prayed together. We have listened to great preachers and theologians reflect on faith and public life. We have hammered out a statement in a democratic format. Through it all, we have determined to stay together and work out the future of our group. We admire and thank all who have been a part of this network thus far. Help us to grow and go further.

OUR MISSION:
by American, Ohioan People who love our religious and civic traditions:

WE BELIEVE! We are called as people of faith and loyal Americans to be
united in dialogue and action to say:
YES to justice for all
NO to prosperity for only a few;
YES to diverse religious expression
NO to self-righteous certainty;
YES to the common good
NO to discrimination against any of God's people;
YES to the voice of religious traditions informing public policy
NO to crossing the lines that separate the institutions of Religion and Government
Approved 1/26/06

OUR SIX ACTION STEPS:

1. We will work on Voter Turn-out and an Absentee Voter Initiative with the goal of clergy turning out 80% of their members.

2. We will work on an initiative to Give Children, Poor and Homeless People a Voice and Vote

3.We will work on an initiative to Preach on Issues of Religion and Social Justice in Our Society.

4. We will establish a Website and maintain it.

5. We will work on an initiative to Create Public Events for "WE BELIEVE!"

6. We will publish a Book of Sermons around these topics.

Again, bring fellow clergy on March 14th. Pass the word. See you there.

On behalf of "We Believe!,"

Tim Ahrens
If questions, call me, 228-1741, ext. 13

We are going to upload a PDF of this letter so that anyone who wishes to print and share a hard copy of this message will be able to do so.

Alternate link for comments

Return of the MViMV Guest Blogs!

My Vote is My Voice is happy to announce that the MViMV Interactive Guest Blogs have returned!

Tonight's guest blog will feature Paul McDevitt from MA, who will discuss "How the State Democratic Party is Changing the Governor Race"

Please join us tonight from 8-9pm EST at the MViMV Blog:

http://blog.myvoteismyvoice.com/

Upcoming Guest Blogs include:

March 6 -- Bob Winkler, "Education, a Primary Tool to Bring About Change"
March 13 -- Aldon Hynes, "Ned Lamont's Grassroots Campaign Against Joe Lieberman"
March 20 -- Chris Warshaw, Democracy For America

The Guest Blogs take place every Monday night from 8-9pm EST on the MViMV Blog:

http://blog.myvoteismyvoice.com/

Alternate link for comments

Paul Hackett on the radio

Got this from Ohio 2nd, er, I mean the "Ohio Happy Fun Time Blog".

Paul Hackett's Fun New Career

From 12:30 to 3PM today Paul will be guest hosting on the Bill Cunningham Show, WLW 700. Should be fun.

Listen online here.

Mon-Fri 12:20pm-3pm
(513) 749-7000
(800) The Big 1


Alternate link for comments

Howard Dean in Aspen on Saturday.

Crushies, pull up your chairs. Have a cup of coffee and a donut or two.



And enjoy this cute picture of Howard from Aspen on Saturday.


Photo Credit: Zach Ornitz/ADN
Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean spoke in Aspen on Saturday.

I found this article, already in the archives at the Aspen Daily News. I don't know if you can read it without registering. They sure archived it fast. He talks about his days there a long time ago, working and skiing.

Howard Dean rallies the troops

Dean -- a physician, former governor of Vermont and 2004 presidential candidate -- was the guest of the Aspen Institute and was in town to fundraise and meet with Democratic Party leaders. He started his remarks by telling the audience he moved to Aspen in September of 1971 and his first job was pouring concrete. Later, he washed pots and pans at the Golden Horn from 4 p.m. to midnight, and skied during the day. "Season passes were $250," he said. "I skied 80 days."

Dean's 45-minute talk, titled "The Democratic Party's Vision for America," attracted the party faithful and others from up and down the Roaring Fork Valley including Pitkin County Commissioner Dorothea Farris and Carbondale Mayor Michael Hassig.

Washing pots and pans, I love it.

Alternate link for comments

Jim Dean and Christine Cegelis on Laura Flanders Tonight

Thanks floridagal for the heads-up on this:

Sunday
Grassroots activists and the Democratic Party. From the Chicago suburbs, congressional candidate CHRISTINE CEGELIS on her-up-from-below primary campaign and JIM DEAN, of Democracy for America, on why the party needs the real thing, not astro-turf.

Here's the link to the Laura Flanders Show web site. It says the show is on from 7 to 10 p.m. Eastern time on weekends.

Related note, State of Belief is coming up on Air America at 5 Eastern time. Even if you don't have a chance to listen to the program, there are some interesting news clips worth checking out at their blog.

And completely unrelated, but wanting to point it out somewhere, the BuckeyeSenate blog is outgrowing its old digs and becoming the Buckeye State Blog. Check it out here.

Alternate link for comments

Once Again

Originally posted on The Underground Railroad

No one has ever gone into heaven except the one who came from heaven -- the Son of Man. Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the desert, so the Son of Man must be lifted up, that everyone who believes in him may have eternal life.

For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son. This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but men loved darkness instead of Light because their deeds were evil.
John 3:13-19

There is one verse in the Bible that everybody knows, no matter what they believe about God - John 3:16. "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life." As well-known as this verse is, it is almost always quoted out of context, completely divorced from the point that Jesus was making when He uttered those words - you must be born again.

Nicodemus, a Pharisee and a member of the Sanhedrin Council, came to Jesus (when nobody was looking) to confess that he believed in Jesus. For His forthright confession Jesus told Nicodemus plainly what He'd taught elsewhere through parables and sayings: you must be born again. Initially, Nicodemus thought that Jesus meant it literally, that a man must be physically born again. Jesus corrected him and let Him know that in order for a man to live in the Spirit he must be born of the Spirit - you must be born again.

The necessity of being born again is a concept that greatly offends postmodern peoples - it's as if they're not good enough as they are. Even some so-called Christians seem to be bothered by assertions that one has to believe in Jesus in order to be on-track with God. How dare anyone say anything about them that is not affirming and comforting, something that excludes anyone! But Jesus said, "Whoever believes in [God's one and only Son] is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son." I didn't say it - Jesus said it.

Jesus said, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me."

Jesus said, "I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in me will live, even though he dies"

Jesus said, "I am the gate; whoever enters through me will be saved. "

Jesus said, "I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep."

Jesus said, "I am the bread of life. He who comes to me will never go hungry, and he who believes in me will never be thirsty."

Jesus said, "I am the vine; you are the branches. If a man remains in me and I in him, he will bear much fruit; apart from me you can do nothing."

One can argue with me all day long, but at the end of the day everybody has to deal with what Jesus said about Himself - no one come to the Father except through Him, you must be born again. Of course, if heaven is not your intended end then you need not concern yourself with Jesus' words - you'll make it to your Final Destination without Him. Again, I didn't say it, Jesus said it: "Whoever believes in [Jesus] is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son." You must be born again.

The choice is yours.

May the LORD bless you and keep you;
May the LORD make His face shine upon you and be gracious to you;
And may the LORD,
Who wants you to become His child,
May He turn His face toward you and give you peace.

Alternate link to comments