Thoughts on Senator Evan Bayh’s Op-Ed

Anyone that has been a long time reader of The Kentucky Democrat knows that I was one of the grassroots leaders of the Americans for Bayh movement. That’s why I did not just post excerpts for Senator Evan Bayh’s op-ed from last week's New York Times. I needed some time to actually sit down and think about what he said.

The Senator writes:

Many of our problems were foreseeable. A public unhappy about the economy will take it out on the party in power, even if the problems began under previous management. What’s more, when one party controls everything—the House, the Senate, the White House—disgruntled voters have only one target for their ire. And the president’s party almost always loses seats in midterm elections.

Nonetheless, recurring patterns of history, broad economic forces and the laws of politics don’t entirely account for the Democrats’ predicament. To a degree we are authors of our own misfortune, and we must chart a better path forward.

It is clear that Democrats over-interpreted our mandate. Talk of a “political realignment” and a “new progressive era” proved wishful thinking. Exit polls in 2008 showed that 22 percent of voters identified themselves as liberals, 32 percent as conservatives and 44 percent as moderates. An electorate that is 76 percent moderate to conservative was not crying out for a move to the left.

I think it is common sense by now that a bulk of the country considers themselves to be either center-left or center-right on the political spectrum. Of the 22% that self-identified as liberal, I am interested in knowing as to where in the spectrum they fit. It is a sad reality, though, that voters upset with the economy chose to take it out on the Democratic Party as opposed to the Republican Party, the ones that got us into the mess especially when they opted to cut tax for the wealthy—and extend said tax cuts when the country was involved with two wars. When was that ever a good idea?

The senator seems to think that the party focused too much on the legislation that focused on health care. Here’s the thing though: we have tried for years to reform the healthcare system but the GOP blocked it because they were too busy looking out for their friends holding executive positions in the insurance industry (sidenote: I have friends that do work for Humana and Congressman John Yarmuth did make sure they did not get the shaft when legislation was written).

We also overreached by focusing on health care rather than job creation during a severe recession. It was a noble aspiration, but $1 trillion in new spending and a major entitlement expansion are best attempted when the Treasury is flush and the economy strong, hardly our situation today.

It should be noted that the new spending was to bailout the banks and automotive industry that needed it or they would have really dug a deeper hole in the American economy. That said, executives should have known not to reward their own self with a big bonus check at the hands of the taxpayers. Like AIG treating themselves to a corporate spa retreat our expense.

I have to applaud John Yarmuth for speaking up to Speaker Pelosi when he did. If he didn’t speak up, the banks wouldn’t have had to pay back the bailouts!

Bayh does note that Congress pandered to the party base and in doing so, voters did not seem to resonate with the issues with a weak economy. The funny thing about this is that Senator Joe Lieberman, often bashed by the liberal wing of the party, has been on the forefront of repealing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” Hell, he introduced the legislation in the Senate! Rational people believe it is time to repeal this. Why should anyone be in favor of discrimination when they know, deep down, it is wrong? Our soldiers are fighting for the liberty and freedoms that American citizens cherish but the gays and lesbians in the military are forced to lie to their fellow comrades just because of who they are.

During election season, Congress sought to placate those on the extreme left and motivate the base — but that meant that our final efforts before the election focused on trying to allow gays in the military, change our immigration system and repeal the George W. Bush-era tax cuts. These are legitimate issues but unlikely to resonate with moderate swing voters in a season of economic discontent.

Sorry, Senator Bayh, but this is one area where we will have to agree to disagree. I consider myself to be center-left in the political spectrum but aside from changing the immigration system, there should have been no problems with such legislation. Anyone that thinks gays and lesbians should not be allowed to serve openly is a bigot.

The immigration system and its eventual reform is a complex issue. On one hand, these people came into the country illegally and don’t even bother paying taxes. On the other hand, they are taking American jobs that Americans don’t want while being paid under the table. This is as bad as outsourcing our jobs to India. Another thing that further complicates things is that two consecutive administrations have decided to ignore requests from governors of the states that sit along the Mexican border when it comes to border patrol. This includes the Homeland Security Secretary being a former governor of Arizona!

The senator critiques the communications problem that the party has.

First, we have more than a communications problem — the public heard us but disagreed with our approach. Democrats need not reassess our goals for America, but we need to seriously rethink how to reach them.

Second, don’t blame the voters. They aren’t stupid or addled by fear. They are skeptical about government efficacy, worried about the deficit and angry that Democrats placed other priorities above their main concern: economic growth.

Senator, have you SEEN what is on FOX News? Start by watching The Daily Show with Jon Stewart.

Senator Bayh talks about tax reform.

good place to start would be tax reform. Get rates down to make American businesses globally competitive. Reward savings and investment. Simplify the code to reduce compliance costs and broaden the base. In 1986, this approach attracted bipartisan support and fostered growth.

The problem with this approach is that I seem to recall the message of the 1992 campaign being “It’s the economy, stupid!” Granted, I was only two in 1986...

Did I hear something about banning federal earmarks?!?

The stereotype of Democrats as wild-eyed spenders and taxers has been resurrected. To regain our political footing, we must prove to moderates that Democrats can make tough choices. Democrats should ban earmarks until the budget is balanced. The amount saved would be modest — but with ordinary Americans sacrificing so much, the symbolic power of politicians cutting their own perks is huge.

Senator, is that with or without repealing tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans? If that’s the case, I understand, but at the same time, some of these federal earmarks lead to jobs.

Speaking of jobs...

Democrats should support a freeze on federal hiring and pay increases. Government isn’t a privileged class and cannot be immune to the times.

Pay increases, I can understand. But wouldn’t a hiring freeze lead to current workers having to work overtime just to get work done? And less unemployed people getting federal jobs?

I wonder if there is some possible way to cooperate with the Republicans in Congress...

Democrats should also improve legislation already enacted. Health care reform, financial regulation and other initiatives were first attempts at solving complex problems, not holy writ. The administration’s grant of sensible exemptions to the health care bill, permitting some employers to offer only basic coverage, is an example of common-sense, results-oriented fine-tuning.

If President Obama and Congressional Democrats were to take these and other moderate steps on tax reform, deficit reduction and energy security, they would confront Republicans with a quandary: cooperate to make America more prosperous and financially stable, running the risk that the president would likely receive the credit, or obstruct what voters perceive as sensible solutions.

Do the Republicans really want to cooperate? Are you calling Mitch McConnell on his bluff? Is he kidding when he says he wants the president to go towards the far right?

Anything else, Senator?

I’m betting the president and his advisers understand much of this. If so, assuming the economy recovers, President Obama can win re-election; Democrats can set the stage for historic achievements in a second term. The extremes of both parties will be disappointed. But the vast center yearning for progress will applaud, and the country will benefit.

I hope so. I can’t stand the idea of another Republican president in 2012.

The Blue Dog Theory

Matt Bai finds that the theory in which Democrats blame the Blue Dogs...does not quite exactly hold up. Matt Bai wrote a brilliant book about the party a few years back. It's called The Argument. I used it as a source for my thesis paper earlier this summer and it's a book that I highly recommend that political junkies of both parties read when they have a chance. If you are in Louisville, the LFPL does have a few copies.

If there was any sliver of hope for moderate Democrats on a catastrophic midterm election night, it was their assumption that now, at least, the party’s leaders would have to focus on recapturing the political center. If nothing else, they reasoned, Speaker Nancy Pelosi would be forced to step aside as party leader, yielding control to Steny H. Hoyer, the Maryland congressman who had been the Blue Dogs’ ally in party leadership.[...]

For the House Blue Dogs — Democrats who are more conservative than their party on fiscal policy and sometimes find themselves out of step with their more liberal colleagues on social issues — last week’s election was like a political Gettysburg, the carnage unfolding all around them. A caucus that comprised 54 Democrats was instantly reduced by half. The top two leaders of the Blue Dog caucus, Stephanie Herseth Sandlin of South Dakota and Baron P. Hill of Indiana, were among those defeated.

A lot of Democrats took it for granted that these defeats marked a repudiation of the speaker and of the party’s liberal agenda. “This election was an old-fashioned whooping,” says Jim Matheson, the Utah Democrat who is next in line to head the Blue Dog Coalition. “You’ve got to shake up your leadership when that happens.”

That is not, however, how Ms. Pelosi’s liberal supporters see it. Even before the votes were cast, a counterargument was already taking hold — that it was the centrist Democrats, and not the liberals in Congress, who had imperiled the party’s majority.[...]

The theory here, embraced by a lot of the most prominent liberal bloggers and activists, is that centrist Democrats doomed the party when they blocked liberals in Congress from making good on President Obama’s promise of bold change. Specifically, they refused to adopt a more populist stance toward business and opposed greater stimulus spending and a government-run health care plan. As a result, the thinking goes, frustrated voters rejected the party for its timidity.

There are a few strange things about this argument, even beyond the contention that American voters — 41 percent of whom described themselves as “conservative” this year, compared with 32 percent in 2006 — somehow deem Congress to be insufficiently liberal.[....]

Similarly, it’s hard to imagine how Democrats in this last Congress could have assembled a majority and passed the president’s agenda — including what is arguably the most consequential social legislation since the Great Society — without having fielded victorious candidates in a lot of conservative districts in 2006 and 2008. In a memo just before the election, titled “Why Liberals Need Heath Shuler,” Jon Cowan and Anne Kim of the centrist group Third Way summed it up this way: “Call them ‘fake Democrats,’ but they delivered a real majority.”

In the end, perhaps this is why Ms. Pelosi won’t be so quick to marginalize the remaining Blue Dogs if she retains her role as leader — no matter what her liberal supporters would prefer. The departing speaker, as everyone knows, can count votes. And for Ms. Pelosi, now 70, to write off the conservative districts where Democrats just lost could well mean writing off her chance of becoming speaker again.

Here in Kentucky, Congressman Ben Chandler, a Blue Dog Democrat, just BARELY got re-elected to the House.

Mark Warner comments on midterms

Virginia Senator, once touted as a potential presidential candidate for 2008 before deciding to run for the United States Senate, had some interesting things to say about the midterm elections. I'm not saying I agree with him with his comments but he does look at the compromise angle. In that regard, seeing as how the Democratic caucus became more liberal in the House as the Republicans go further to the right, we're going to see a lot of gridlock.

You can view the video with the audio of Mark Warner's comments here.

"There are a lot of folks I think on both sides, but the question will be will the super-left on my party - the MoveOn crowd in my party - and the Tea Party crowd on the other party, you know, they don't compromise, so you know, I for one am...you know, there were too many times I bit my lip in the first year, or bit my tongue...I'm done..."

Keep in mind that Warner both governed and campaigned as a centrist. When they were both looking at a presidential bid, both then-Governor Warner and now outgoing Senator Evan Bayh were going after the same money people.

I wouldn't consider myself a MoveOn Democrat but I am on their mailing list and will continue to be on said list.

Rand Paul flip-flops on key campaign promise

Senator-elect Rand Paul has flip-flopped on one of his key campaign promises. Maybe there is actually something in the Potomac River that effects every single person elected to Washington. My guess is that the outgoing senator, Russ Feingold, was one of the few to get vaccinated from whatever this epidemic that only affects elected officials.

Think Progress:

One Tea Party hero, Senator-elect Rand Paul (R-KY), jumped on the anti-earmark bandwagon early, making “a ban on wasteful earmark spending in Washington D.C. one of the key points of his campaign” in March. Lambasting lawmakers who opt for “photo-ops with oversized fake cardboard checks,” Paul vowed to “dismantle the culture of professional politicians” even if he “ruffled a lot of establishment feathers” while doing it.

Look at an excerpt of his profile in the Wall Street Journal:

Father and son, age 47, have different styles. Asked what he wanted to do in Washington in a Wednesday morning television interview, the senator-elect said that his kids were hoping to meet the Obama girls. He has made other concessions to the mainstream. He now avoids his dad’s talk of shuttering the Federal Reserve and abolishing the income tax. In a bigger shift from his campaign pledge to end earmarks, he tells me that they are a bad “symbol” of easy spending but that he will fight for Kentucky’s share of earmarks and federal pork, as long as it’s doled out transparently at the committee level and not parachuted in in the dead of night. “I will advocate for Kentucky’s interests,” he says.

So you’re not a crazy libertarian? “Not that crazy,” he cracks.

Remember this is the same guy that said he would not take ANY MONEY from Republican senators that voted for the bailouts only to say after the primary that that was a campaign promise that applied to the primary campaign.

Rand Paul is not a politician that sticks to his guts. The tea party movement that backed him will soon realize that they are the ones that will be left to hang out and dry.

Senator Jim Webb on Reagan Democrats

Senator Jim Webb recently spoke about why the Reagan Democrats still matter.

Jim Webb went to the White House last September. The Virginia senator was meeting with the president to discuss Guantanamo detainees. The conversation soon shifted to healthcare. "I told him this was going to be a disaster," Webb recalls. "The president believed it was all going to work out."[...]

"I've been warning them," Webb says, sighing, resting his chin on his hand. "I've been having discussions with our leadership ever since I've been up here. I decided to run as a Democrat because I happen to strongly believe in Jacksonian democracy. There needs to be one party that very clearly represents the interests of working people ... I'm very concerned about the transactional nature of the Democratic Party. Its evolved too strongly into interest groups rather than representing working people, including small business people."

This is a decades-old rebuke, one uttered today by moderate Democrats like Webb. The balkanized coalition never came to recognize the vice of its virtues. Diverse interests sometimes severed it from the majority's interests. That fissure moved political tectonics by the 1980s. And we came to know these migrating voters by the president who won their favor.

Webb is a Reagan Democrat who returned home. He was Ronald Reagan's Navy secretary. Almost two decades later, he was the Democrat who scrapped out a win in Virginia.

Webb seems less at home today. He identifies himself as a Democrat. But he has few Democratic leaders to identify with. He won't say this. His criticism is discernibly girdled. He begins to tell a story about a conversation with a Democratic leader and pulls back. "I don't want to talk about that," he mutters. "I have had my discussions. I've kept them inside the house. I did not want to have them affect this election, quite frankly. I didn't want to position myself in the media as a critic of the administration."

But criticism is in order. Democrats' suffered historical losses from Congress to the state houses last week. It's an apt moment for Webb to step in. He is an atypical politician. Politics is not his alpha or omega. He's authored more than half a dozen books, succeeded as a screenwriter and won an Emmy for his coverage of the U.S. Marines in Beirut. This success outside politics empowers him to be less political. Yet what suits Webb to criticism is not that. It's the political sociology he embodies.

Webb represents an endangered species. It's more than his red state Democratic stature, although that would be reason enough. The moderate House Democratic coalition lost more than half its lawmakers last week. But that Blue Dog set is still more common than Webb.

Webb's one of the last FDR Democrats. An economic populist. A national security hawk. His Democratic politics are less concerned with social groups than social equality (of opportunity, not outcome). His values were predominant in the Democrat Party from FDR to JFK, the period in the twentieth century when Democrats were also dominant.

Webb walks to this older Democratic beat. Today's Democrats' are more McGovern than JFK. (Could a John Kennedy win the Democratic nomination today?)

Democrats looked like McGovern on Tuesday. It was that bad historically, for congressional elections. The election's passage has liberated Webb (a little). He's privately raised issues throughout Barack Obama's tenure. Some frustration is tactical. He told Rahm Emanuel last June that the president should provide a "very specific format" for his vision of healthcare reform. It would have offset the, in Webb's words, "complex amorphous leviathan that bubbled up out of five committees."[...]

Webb swallowed the bitter pill in the end. He voted for the final healthcare package. He quickly notes that he's open to improving the legislation. These issues will dog Webb two years from now, when his term ends.

But is Webb running again?

"Still sorting that out," he replies. "I'm not saying I'm not."

ESPN fires Joe Morgan by not renewing contract

ESPN fired Joe Morgan in a way. His contract was up for renewal and they didn't renew it.

Jon Miller and Joe Morgan's 21-year run on ESPN's "Sunday Night Baseball" is over.

Morgan's contract is expiring and he will not be renewed. Miller's contract is also expiring though he may remain at ESPN working the "Sunday Night Baseball" series and postseason baseball for ESPN Radio.

"Jon and Joe have contributed greatly to the success of 'Sunday Night Baseball' for the past 21 seasons," ESPN executive vice president Norby Williams said in a statement Monday. "Over the last two decades, Joe went from Hall of Fame player to one of his sport's top analysts and Jon's Hall of Fame voice and tremendous knowledge of the game have connected with baseball fans everywhere. We owe them our deepest thanks for an outstanding body of work."

Miller, the play-by-play voice, received the Baseball Hall of Fame's 2010 Ford C. Frick Award. Morgan, the color commentator, was a two-time National League MVP with the Cincinnati Reds. The second baseman was elected to the Hall of Fame in 1990.

While Joe Morgan has recieved his fair share of criticism, Jon Miller will be missed.

Some thoughts on 2012...

Some personal thoughts on 2012...while I am not saying that I would not endorse the president’s re-election but if there were someone to challenge President Obama on the mere basis of an ideological or principles-based run similar to what happened in 1968 before President Johnson announced that he would not be a candidate for re-election, I would be all for it. Don’t get me wrong. I’m not saying I dislike the guy but it is moreso on getting the White House back to principles.
I’m hearing from a lot of folks that President Obama’s administration is resembling President Carter’s more and more every day. Don’t get me wrong but the last person that anyone wants to copy is that of Carter. Obama needs a Clinton-like approach to way that he governs as president during the next two years. Before his affair and kid out of wedlock, I would have said that John Edwards, a former senator from North Carolina, would have made a great challenge to the president given that he ran his campaign on a populist approach with the whole two Americas message.
As has been the case for the past few cycles, whoever is at the top of the ticket has somewhat of a say on how the races play out down the ticket.
It still looks as if there are two Americas. The rich keep getting richer and the poor keep getting poorer. If the GOP has their way over these next two years, it will stay the same especially ALL the Bush tax cuts get extended. People are complaining of a deficit problem but the thing is that we need to undo the mess that the Bush administration got us into when they cut taxes for the wealthy. Congress needs to extend the tax cuts for the middle class but undo the tax cuts for anyone that makes $250,000 and over. This way, they would be paying what they paid during the Clinton years and we would have a balanced budget leaving a huge surplus which would go towards paying off the national debt.
It is what would have happened during the Bush years if he didn’t lead us into the Iraq mess. Afghanistan was justified and no one has ever questioned that. No one with a rational mind, that is.
The current outlook now is that all the Bush tax cuts will expire. With the way that the economy is looking, we cannot afford allowing the tax cuts for the middle class to expire.

More thoughts on the KDP Chairmanship

Someone has to say it. Technically speaking, Joe did earlier and to a latter extent, I did, too, earlier this morning before my morning caffeine intake. I realize that there was a lot of stuff that went down when he Jerry Lundergan was first named as the state party chair. Hell, Governor Beshear was one of the first folks to resign as the party’s lawyer if I recall.
Rebuilding the party is going to take a lot of work and a lot of time to do so. If Lundergan was able to bring in all these leaders the last time he was chair, who is to say that he wouldn’t be able to do so again next year?
Hell, I’d wager to say that it was Jerry Lundergan moreso than Dan Logsdon that was the most instrumental in bringing in President Bill Clinton to campaign on the behalf of Attorney General Jack Conway’s failed campaign for the United States Senate.
Well, what do you think? Thoughts?

Is Dan Logsdon resigning?

If the rumors that Dan Logsdon is resigning as the State Party Chairman are true, the party needs to find someone that is willing to step up their A game so that we don't lose the statewide races. We need to find someone that will rile up the base a la Howard Dean.

It's a ighter year given that all we have are statewide races to worry about but it's also a worrysome year in that there is the 50% chance that David Williams leads the Republican gubernatorial ticket not because of his merits but because of his running mate's college history.

We need someone with the charisma of Jerry Lundergan. I admit that I was not his biggest fan during the beginning of his chairmanship but I warmed up to his leadership during his term. What he was able to do was to bring in all these leaders at individual party dinners in each district. I remember volunteering for the October 2005 dinner in which they brought in then-Senator Joe Biden. Biden missed his flight so he stayed late while talking with the Young Democrats that had volunteered that night.

There was the Family Day event, in which former Senator Max Cleland was brought in. I don't know if they've repeated that event.

Bob offers his suggestions:

There needs to be someone who is politically tied in to the Democratic party loyalists across Kentucky, and who has decades of experience. Like Logsdon, this person MUST work full-time at the position. For 2011, it will actually be a slightly lighter year in many ways. While the entire statewide office slate of races is up, there will be no legislative races.

What else is needed? Something that may be beyond the ability of any chair to provide: the Democratic leadership in the executive branch, the house and the senate need to be looking out for everyone’s interests, and not just the interests of one of those areas. The first great example of that will come with the ten-year redistricting. Last time around, one of the areas of leadership essentially said of redistricting that as long as that area got what it wanted, there was little concern for other changes in the redistricting. As a result, the Republican advantage in the senate that had been cobbled together with discontented eastern Kentucky Democratic senators was stretched further with custom-made districts. Ten years later, those districts that were meant to secure the House have only forestalled a day of horrible reckoning that began last week. Discharge of bills will now be an available maneuver in the House.[...]

The Democratic Party needs to confer and work together, not just to secure the governorship next year, but to wake up and recognize that one chamber of the legislature and the executive branch cannot be played against each other, and that working together can paint the Republican senate in its true obstructionist colors, and that working together can result in the coordinated plan beating out the senate leadership.

A Balanced Budget

I just caught a clip of Rand Paul's appearance this morning on ABC's This Week. He proposed a balanced budget amendment. What's funny is President Bill Clinton proposed the same thing, if not something similar, when he was president and yet the Republicans chided him for it.

President Clinton's White House bio notes the balanced budget while he was in office:

During the administration of William Jefferson Clinton, the U.S. enjoyed more peace and economic well being than at any time in its history. He was the first Democratic president since Franklin D. Roosevelt to win a second term. He could point to the lowest unemployment rate in modern times, the lowest inflation in 30 years, the highest home ownership in the country's history, dropping crime rates in many places, and reduced welfare rolls. He proposed the first balanced budget in decades and achieved a budget surplus. As part of a plan to celebrate the millennium in 2000, Clinton called for a great national initiative to end racial discrimination.

Here's some old news coverage from CNN back in September 2000.

President Clinton announced Wednesday that the federal budget surplus for fiscal year 2000 amounted to at least $230 billion, making it the largest in U.S. history and topping last year's record surplus of $122.7 billion.

"Eight years ago, our future was at risk," Clinton said Wednesday morning. "Economic growth was low, unemployment was high, interest rates were high, the federal debt had quadrupled in the previous 12 years. When Vice President Gore and I took office, the budget deficit was $290 billion, and it was projected this year the budget deficit would be $455 billion."

Instead, the president explained, the $5.7 trillion national debt has been reduced by $360 billion in the last three years -- $223 billion this year alone.

This represents, Clinton said, "the largest one-year debt reduction in the history of the United States."[...]

It is the third year in a row the federal government has taken in more than it spent, and has paid down the debt. The last time the U.S. government had a third consecutive year of national debt reduction was 1949, said the official.

The federal budget surplus for fiscal year 1999 was $122.7 billion, and $69.2 billion for fiscal year 1998. Those back-to-back surpluses, the first since 1957, allowed the Treasury to pay down $138 billion in national debt.

Just look at the Clinton Library...

Republican Congressman Eric Cantor FAVORS Shutdown

Congressman Eric Cantor opposes compromise on any Bush tax cut extensions and in fact, he ins in favor of a federal government shut down. Can he be further out of touch with reality? Does he not realize that we need to undo the tax cuts for the wealthiest one percent.

Just as Senate Minority Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) has attempted to lower expectations in recent days by saying that Republicans can't really accomplish anything unless President Obama is voted out of office in 2012, so too did Rep. Eric Cantor (R-Va.) set the stage on Sunday by declaring that any lack of progress in Congress -- including a possible government shutdown -- will be Obama's fault.

"I would say, Chris, it's as much his responsibility," said Cantor in response to a question from Fox News Sunday host Chris Wallace about who will be to blame for a government shutdown or a default on the debt. "In fact, he is the one who sets the agenda as the chief executive and as the president of this country."

Cantor also made clear that if there's going to be any compromise, it's going to have to come from Obama, who has said he is willing to work with Republicans. Cantor, however, said that Republicans will work with Obama only if he agrees with them 100 percent.

"Listen, are we willing to work with him?" said Cantor on Sunday. "First and foremost, we're not going to be willing to work with him on the expansive liberal agenda he's been about, but if he is serious about working with us on things like earmarks, for instance -- which he said he would work with me on that -- I'm absolutely hopeful we can do that. I hope he calls Harry Reid the first thing to get the Senate to go along with the House position."[...]

On the Bush tax cuts, President Obama has indicated that he may be open to extending all of them, which is something the Republicans have been pushing for. But, his compromise would be that the middle-class tax cuts would be extended permanently, while the ones for the families making more than $250,000 would be extended temporarily. As The Washington Post explained, this "decoupling" strategy would "focus the debate when tax cuts for the rich expired next year or the year after. Republicans would be forced to defend carve-outs for a tiny minority populated by millionaires, an unpopular position that would be difficult to advance without the cover of a broad-based tax cut for everyone, aides in both parties said."

Legalize expanded gaming

With the Breeders' Cup now over along with the elections, the state needs to get down to business.

The horse industry, in particular, is focusing their efforts on expanded gaming. As a native Kentuckian, who did move to Chicago and had to move back because of the economy, I would prefer that my revenue stay in state than go out of state. That's why I support the thoroughbred industry in the commonwealth. Sadly, David Williams doesn't.

But those in the horse industry said that despite Tuesday’s setbacks, they are still pushing for video lottery terminals at the state’s tracks and would possibly consider a constitutional amendment that would allow voters to decide the issue.[...]

Senate President David Williams, R-Burkesville, said Wednesday that if the Democratic-controlled House passed a constitutional amendment, the Republican Senate might consider it. However, there are still questions about what a constitutional amendment would say and how revenues from expanded gambling would be divided among the state, gambling interests and the horse industry.

“If they are interested in advancing gaming, that appears to be the only avenue left for them,” Williams said.

But Williams stopped short of saying a constitutional amendment would pass.

“I’ve heard that there might be some folks in the Senate that may be supportive of that,” Williams said. “Personally, I’m not.”

House Speaker Greg Stumbo, D-Prestonsburg, was not available for comment on Wednesday.[...]

Kerri Richardson, a spokeswoman for Beshear, said that it was too early to say whether Beshear would push for a constitutional amendment.

“However, he remains committed to finding ways to assist our ailing horse industry and its 100,000 Kentucky jobs.”

Democrats may be hesitant to push for a constitutional amendment — which the public could not vote on until 2012 — because social issues tend to bring out more conservative voters. In 2004, an amendment to allow for same-sex marriage helped Republican candidates.

The issue of allowing slots at the tracks has been debated in the state’s legislature for more than two decades. But all efforts to get a change in law approved by the Senate have failed.

David Williams is the main person here that is stopping progress from happening.

Patrick Neely commented on the matter. He's heading up KEEP and keep in mind, he also ran the congressional campaigns for former Congresswoman Anne Northup.

Patrick Neely, of the Kentucky Equine Education Project or KEEP, would not say whether the trade group that has pushed for the expansion of gambling would change its position and support a constitutional amendment.

“We need to be able to compete,” Neely said. “We will go to Frankfort with the same message… Absent a change, this downward trend is only going to get worse.”

The horse industry says it needs expanded gambling at tracks that are losing races to neighboring states with purses beefed up by revenues from slots and other gambling.

Neely said Wednesday that although two horse industry candidates lost, the biggest change this election cycle was the number of candidates who support a constitutional amendment that would allow voters to decide the issue.

“Most candidates who were running for office for the first time supported the industry and supported putting expanded gambling on the ballot. This is a significant shift from four years ago,” Neely said.

It's time for the General Assembly to work together and move Kentucky forward.

Blogroll restored

The blogroll has been restored. Several links have been taken off seeing as how those links are dead.

Blogrolling.com is done

Blogrolling.com is no longer operating so I'll will be busy with having to rebuild the blogroll. I just found out about this. Sadly, the option of exporting my links was unavailble to me. Thanks to the Wayback Machine, I'm able to recover all my links as of July 2007. Unfortunately, seeing as that was back when Mark Nicholas and Ben Carter were still in business, amongst several other websites that are now down, I am going to completely redo the blogroll.

I've gotten essential links up as of now that are related to the Kentucky state government, Kentucky political and media blogs, the major national blogs, along with relevant Democratic Party links, etc.

My apologies for the inconvience.

President Obama favors tax cut extensions

President Barack Obama has spoken out in favor of extending the Bush tax cuts for middle class families.

“I want to make my priorities clear from the start,” Obama said. “One: middle-class families need permanent tax relief. And two: I believe we can’t afford to borrow and spend another $700 billion on permanent tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires.”

The president said he agrees with Republicans that the deficit needs to be brought under control, but that the country cannot afford the additional $700 billion it would cost to extend tax cuts to the wealthiest 2 percent of Americans. “We’d be digging ourselves into an even deeper fiscal hole and passing the burden on to our children,” Obama said.[...]

“For the past decade, they saw their costs rise, their incomes fall, and too many jobs go overseas,” the president said. “They’re the ones bearing the brunt of the recession. They are the ones who need relief right now.”

He called on Congress to act on his proposal to freeze non-security discretionary spending for three years as a way of reducing government spending. “It would bring this spending down to its lowest level as share of the economy in 50 years,” Obama said.

Make no mistake about it. If Congress passes an extension for the wealthy, we are not doing anything we can to dig ourselves out of a hole dug by the Republicans in the early 2000s.

More on Keith Olbermann

Josh offers his take over at TPM:

I find the Keith Olbermann story bizarre, on both sides but mainly on MSNBC's. First, political contribution records are the most public thing in the world for anyone who is even somewhat in the public eye, certainly for someone who courts controversy. So political giving strikes me as something done entirely in the open for someone of Olbermann's stature. On the one hand that sounds like MSNBC is flipping out about something that must have been all but an open secret. On the other, if this is MSNBC's policy, why was Olbermann openly flouting it?

Second, MSNBC's policy forbids employees from making donations to political candidates, unless they ask for permission to do so, in which it seems usually to be granted. That seems to me to undercut the principle behind the policy.

But of course all of this pales behind the larger point which is that Olbermann's job at MSNBC is to be an extremely opinionated commentator on politics. And he's the centerpiece (along with Maddow and more equivocally, Matthews) behind the business strategy of making MSNBC the liberal cable news/chat network. (How they square that with simultaneously having a more traditional and by the books NBC News is something they clearly have yet to work out.) But when you take that all into account, seeing him now all but canned over a handful of individual political contributions because he's compromised the objectivity he's supposed to bring to the job sounds like a bit of a joke.

Josh does offer more insight into this at TPM.

Claiborne Farms-bred Blame wins Breeder's Cup Classic

It was not the day it was supposed to be for Zenyatta. Instead, the day went to Blame, the Kentucky thoroghbred bred and owned by Adele B Dilschneider and Claiborne Farm, celebrating their 100th anniversary this year.

On that note, it is very important that the Commonwealth of Kentucky is able to keep their horse farms in business. Unfortunately, Dictator David Williams does not agree. He'd rather the revenue continue to go out of state to Indiana, Missouri, Illinois, and in the next few years, Ohio.

We need the Kentucky State Senate to step up their game in the next session and finally pass an expanded gaming bill that will allow slots to be played at race tracks or free-standing casinos to keep Kentucky money in Kentucky. The money will allow the state to make progress.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton won't run for President

Former presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, currently serving as Secretary of State, has opted not to run for president again in 2012 or 2016.

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton ruled out running for president in 2012 or 2016 on Friday, saying the United States should be ready for a woman president but it would not be her.

In interviews in New Zealand, the failed 2008 presidential candidate made clear she had no plans to run again despite talk -- fueled partly by her fellow Democrats' losses in Tuesday's U.S. mid-term elections -- she might embark on a new race.

Asked by TV3 New Zealand whether she ruled out standing for the top U.S. office through 2016, Clinton, according to a U.S. reporter, replied: "Oh yes, yes. I'm very pleased to be doing what I'm doing as secretary of state."

In a separate interview with TV New Zealand, Clinton said she hoped the United States was ready for a female president, adding "it should be."

Asked if it might be her, she replied: "Well, not me. But it will be someone and it is nice coming to countries that have already proven that they can elect women to the highest governing positions that they have in their systems."

Time to worry about domestic policy...

For the Jews that voted Democratic, like myself, it is time to start worrying about domestic policies once again now that the Republicans have taken over the House come January.

Jewish politicos and communal activists began the process of adjustment, bidding farewell to five Jewish incumbents who did not survive the Republican upset and becoming acquainted with newcomers, many of them Tea Party candidates previously unknown to a community that prides itself on building bridges with politicians of both parties.

Jewish voters did not seem to take part in the anti-Democratic wave that swept the nation. According to a poll commissioned by the dovish J Street lobby, 66% of Jewish voters chose the Democratic candidates for Congress in their districts. There was no national Jewish poll conducted in the 2006 midterm election, but the percentage this year was lower than the 78% of Jews who voted for Barack Obama in 2008.

In a separate survey that focused on the state of Pennsylvania, where Democratic senatorial candidate Joe Sestak was attacked for his views on Israel, results were similar, with 71% of Jewish voters saying they sided with Sestak on Election Day.

While the Republican congressional takeover is expected to have little impact on issues relating to Israel and the Middle East that are of concern to Jewish Americans, it will significantly affect the community’s domestic agenda.

“Among the lessons of the vote was that the American people are speaking out against spending; that’s clearly where the wind is blowing,” said William Daroff, vice president for public policy and director of the Washington office of The Jewish Federations of North America, an umbrella organization for Jewish federations that provide social services, some of them now expected to be on the chopping block.

Delivering the point of changing priorities was Virginia Rep. Eric Cantor, now the sole Jewish Republican in Congress, soon to be the highest-ranking Jew in congressional history. Cantor, expected to become House majority leader, made clear in an interview with CNN that Republicans’ first order of business when the new Congress is sworn in will be cutting government spending. “We need to put federal government on a diet,” Cantor said, speaking as ballots closed throughout the country and as returns showed massive gains for his party.

It is a kind of diet that is worrying Jewish organizations. Major groups, including the federation system, have been fighting to increase spending to broaden the social safety net and expand benefits for the needy. Now, the Republican majority in the House is likely to prompt the Jewish community to re-examine its domestic priorities and to focus on fighting cuts. Expanding entitlements and introducing new social legislation will move to the back burner.

Several Jewish activists have already spoken about putting aside key issues from their agenda, including immigration reform and energy legislation, since chances for passage were all but eliminated by the congressional upset. “We are a pragmatic organization, and we will hold on to our views” said Rabbi Steve Gutow, president of the Jewish Council for Public Affairs, “but where we put our time and effort will be in places where we can make a difference.”

Instead, Jewish groups are expected to concentrate on the looming budget cuts facing the basic entitlement programs — Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid — as well as on continuing the fight for smaller social programs, such as the reauthorization of the Child Nutrition Act.

Reductions in Medicare and Medicaid have been suggested by both sides of the aisle and could be part of the recommendations from a bipartisan White House fiscal commission, due on December 1. A Republican-led House would make it easier to approve such recommendations.

Time will tell.

Chicago Jewish community not bothered...

The Chicago Jewish community appears to be getting along just well following last week's events.

The weekend after news broke that two parcels addressed to Chicago Jewish institutions had been intercepted en route and found to contain bombs, it was business as usual at the city’s synagogues and kosher restaurants, and at the Bernard Horwich JCC in West Rogers Park, one of several heavily Jewish neighborhoods in Chicagoland.

There was no visible presence of Chicago police at area Jewish institutions, and families came and went casually, Orthodox children darting along the sidewalks between kids in Halloween costumes.[...]


Rabbi Asher Lopatin, the spiritual leader of Anshe Sholom B’Nai Israel Congregation, an Orthodox synagogue in the Lakeview neighborhood on the North Side, agreed that the terror threat hasn’t disturbed a feeling of security among Chicago’s Jews. Lopatin said his synagogue had not been notified that it was targeted, and from the news reports, he’s not sure that any Jewish institutions were really the target of the packages.

“It doesn’t really seem [the terrorists] had a grasp of who was targeted,” Lopatin said. “Perhaps they were just using those addresses to get the packages on the planes.”

Lopatin said that Chicago’s Jews generally feel safe, as do most Americans. Part of the reason for this is the “warm” relations with the area’s Muslims, whom Lopatin described as a “partner minority.” He contrasted the situation for Jews in Chicago with that in Paris, where Muslim youths have beaten and murdered Jews on several occasions. In Chicago, Lopatin noted that the Council of Islamic Organizations of Greater Chicago issued a statement condemning the attacks immediately after the first news reports broke stating that area Jewish institutions were targeted.

“We feel comfortable in our neighborhood wearing kippot,” Lopatin said. “We are not going to let the threat of terrorism stop us from being welcoming.”

Bill Kristol on Keith Olbermann

Bill Kristol and I are in complete agreement on this. Regarding the choice of language Bill uses, I'm obviously going to agree to disagree but the facts are facts: everyone is entitled to free speech. The Republican argument is that money is speech or the campaign finance reform would not have been thrown out this year. FOX News hires commentators that are very political and raise money all the time for conservative candidates. Countdown is an opinion-based show. Everyone knows that Keith Olbermann is a Democrat. He doesn't deserve to lose his job over political contributions. He wasn't getting any political favors as a result of said donations.

MSNBC’s suspension of Keith Olbermann is ludicrous.

First, he donated money to candidates he liked. He didn’t take money, or favors, in a way that influenced his reporting.

Second, he’s not a reporter. It’s an opinion show. If Olbermann wants to put his money where his mouth is, more power to him.

Third, GE, the corporate parent of MSNBC, gives money to political organizations. GE executives and, I’m sure, NBC executives give money. Why can’t Olbermann?

Perhaps Olbermann violated NBC News “policy and standards.” But NBC doesn’t have real news standards for MSNBC—otherwise the channel wouldn’t exist. It’s a little strange to get all high and mighty now.

SAVE KEITH!

The MSNBC statement can be found here:

"I became aware of Keith's political contributions late last night," Phil Griffin, president of MSNBC, said in a statement. "Mindful of NBC News policy and standards, I have suspended him indefinitely without pay."

What Michael Bloomberg thinks...

I'm not sure what to make of this. On one hand, I've always admired New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg and always hoped we would make an independent run for the presidency. On the other hand, President Barack Obama eing referred to as "arrogant" does not look good for him.

Politico:

New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg was taken aback by President Obama's arrogance, Rupert Murdoch said in an interview with an Australian outlet.

Bloomberg described his conversation with Obama as "verbal ping-pong," Murdoch told the Australian Financial Review, and said he had a "pleasant" day golfing on Martha's Vineyard with the president.

"He came back and said, 'I never met in my life such an arrogant man.'" Murdoch said.

Granted it is Rupert Murdoch being quoted.

Politico does have an update to their story:

"He remembers the conversation differently," said Wolfson, who said he'd reached the mayor in Hong Kong. "As he has said many times he believes all Americans should be rooting for the President to succeed."

Just reached the Mayor in hong kong. He remembers the conversation differently. As he has said many times he believes all Americans should be rooting for the President to succeed.

Wolfson did not directly deny Murdoch's claim Bloomberg had called, or considered, Obama arrogant.

ESPN Radio back in Louisville!

ESPN Radio is back on the air in Louisville, Kentucky. Point your dials to 680 AM.

WDRD was formerly the Radio Disney affiliate.

Thing is, this allegedly happened a month ago so WHY WAS IT NOT MENTIONED IN THE COURIER-JOURNAL!??

Why are we just NOW hearing about this?!?

Who wants to be the DSCC Chair?!?

That's the big question. There are 23 Democrats and 10 Republicans that will be up for re-election in 2012. This is due to the big Democratic wave in 2006. Does anyone want to serve as chairman? Well...

When asked on election night who would now lead the DSCC, New Jersey Sen. Robert Menendez, the current chairman, answered jokingly.

"A crazy person," he quipped.

But Menendez may have a point.

Democrats have a nightmare election cycle looming, with 23 seats up for grabs in 2012, while Republicans have to defend only nine seats. Several of those Democrats are rookies who won in 2006 in formerly Republican seats in places like like Montana, Missouri and Virginia.[...]

Many would-be candidates, like Menendez, are up for reelection in 2012 and have to worry about their own campaigns. And many who would seem to be ideal candidates so far have flatly rejected the idea. Menendez himself had to be talked into taking the job in the aftermath of the 2008 elections. If all else fails, some are even talking about bringing New York Sen. Chuck Schumer back to run the DSCC for a third cycle.[...]

Virginia Sen. Mark Warner, who doesn’t have to worry about reelection until 2014, has been repeatedly floated as a possible replacement because of his fundraising prowess and ties to business — but his spokesman said that it’s “absolutely not happening.”

What about Oregon Sen. Jeff Merkley? A spokesman says Merkley has “no interest” in being DSCC chairman.

New Hampshire Sen. Jeanne Shaheen? “Not interested,” her spokesman says.

Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) has also taken himself out of consideration. Franken was seen as a potentially strong choice for DSCC chairman because of his fundraising prowess and widespread name recognition among potential donors.

But Franken has no interest in the assignment, according to his office. “Sen. Franken is focused on working for the people Minnesota and has no interest in heading up the DSCC,” said Ed Shelleby, Franken’s spokesman.

Other more junior senators have turned down the idea in interviews with POLITICO, including Alaska Sen. Mark Begich, New Mexico Sen. Tom Udall and his cousin, Colorado Sen. Mark Udall.[...]

But the political environment shifted markedly, and Democrats won the Senate majority from the 2006 midterms — after which the then-chairman of the DSCC, Schumer, was rewarded with the No. 3 spot in Senate leadership, which still gives him enormous influence to shape the party’s political and legislative agenda. In 2008, Schumer increased his clout by staying on for another term as DSCC chairman and helping lead Democrats to a 60-seat, filibuster-proof majority.

“I was saying to Chuck, ‘Have you lost your mind?'” Sen. Tom Carper (D-Del.) said of Schumer’s repeated terms as DSCC chairman. “But we’re glad that he did it.”[...]

This year, with Reid winning his bruising reelection bid, there won’t be a race to succeed him as leader. And that has only increased speculation that Schumer — a possible Reid successor — may ultimately be pressured to return as DSCC chairman this cycle.

Schumer’s aides in the past have dismissed such speculation, but his spokesman, Brian Fallon, did not respond to an inquiry Thursday.

Time will tell.

Howard Dean won't challenge in primary

Former DNC Chairman Howard Dean has ruled out a run for president in 2012. Dean's name came up as a potential primary challenger following Tuesday night's disastrous results across the nation.

The former head of the Democratic National Committee is traveling on business in Canada, but his spokesperson, Karen Finney, was as clear as can be on this issue. Pushing back hard on the growing chatter that Dean is thinking about or would undertake a challenge to Obama, Finney said, "It's absolutely not true. He supports President Obama in 2012 and he has repeatedly said so publicly." In fact, Finney said, Dean said so several times on CNBC's "Squawk Box" on Nov. 2.

Yes, I did ask the next question. Is the Dean denial categorical? "He is absolutely, categorically not running in 2012." Can't get anymore definitive than that?

Dean joins Senator Russ Feingold in ruling out a run in 2012.

Bristol Palin didn't vote!

Bristol Palin, the daughter of potential Republican presidential candidate Sarah Palin (the ex-Governor of Alaska who quit halfway through her term so that she could prepare to run for the presidency instead of governing those who voted her governor), admitted to Inside Edition that she forgot to turn in her absentee ballot.

Bristol Palin makes a surprising admission.

"I did not send in my absentee ballots in Alaska," she told INSIDE EDITION after Tuesday night's Dancing with the Stars show.

That's right, the daughter of one of the most prominent political figures of the day didn't vote in Tuesday's big election.

But she did weigh in on whether she'd want her mom to run for President in 2012.

"Of course I do. I know that she's great and she'd be great for our country," said the 20-year-old.

Meanwhile, Meghan McCain blasts Bristol Palin for not voting.

And last night, Meghan McCain blasted her for it.

"If you didn't vote in my family that was like bad news. I've been voting since I turned 18," McCain told Jay Leno on his Tonight Show last night.

"I guess it's only important for Bristol Palin to vote for Dancing With The Stars. I think a lot of women worked really hard to give us the right to vote. Anyone that doesn't vote is just ridiculous."

McCain also had words for Bristol's mom:

Geithner visited Jon Stewart

How interesting. Back in April, Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner visited Jon Stewart to have an off the record talk about the United States economy.

In the midst of debates on financial regulation and China’s currency in April, Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner sat down to discuss the U.S. economy -- with comedian Jon Stewart.

Geithner and Stewart, host of Comedy Central’s “The Daily Show,” held an off-the-record meeting at Stewart’s office in New York on April 2, according to Geithner’s appointments calendar, updated through August on Treasury’s website.

Geithner didn’t stay for a television interview with Stewart although other administration officials -- most notably President Barack Obama last week -- have turned up for on-camera chats.

“Jon Stewart is influential in America, so we took the opportunity for the two to meet and to discuss the economy,” Treasury spokesman Steve Adamske said in an e-mail yesterday. Stewart’s program has poked fun at Geithner, including a segment last year about the Treasury secretary’s trouble selling his New York home.

Post-Election Rundown

Speaking to Commentary Magazine, Josh Block, a Democratic, pro-Israel activist, and former AIPAC spokesman, says that the three candidates endorsed by J Street lost all of their races while 14 of 25 candidates in competitive races also went down in defeat:

Being associated with a group that helped [Richard] Goldstone slander Israel on the Hill, that refuses to condemn his report and accusation that the leadership of Israel PURPOSEFULLY targeted civilians in Gaza, that says there’s no difference between Israel defending itself and Hamas terrorism, that lies about their secret money from anti-Israel George Soros, and derives half their budget from Hong Kong — not from American Jews as they claim — and that lies again and again, even twisting the arm of a former Israeli MK to lie for them after she is on tape exposing their ties to Goldstone, is HAZARDOUS for one’s pro-Israel reputation. … The question candidates in competitive races will be asking themselves is this: Is it worth it to lie down with dogs if all you get is flees!? The answer, I predict, will increasingly be no, it’s not worth it. Unless of course, you’re not pro-Israel.

J Street's statement can be found in an article here.

Josh replied to the article in the Washington Jewish Week and you can read that here. Just look at the race in Illinois between Jan Schakowsky and Joel Pollak. That race turned out to be AIPAC vs. J Street. Congresswoman Schakowsky did win her re-election but Alan Dershowitz broke rank with the Democratic Party, which he usually supports, to speak at a fundraiser for Joel Pollak. Some excerpts from Block's reply follow:

I usually evince more discipline than to 'respond' to someone's welcome and predictable reaction to being confronted with uncomfortable facts and truths they would like nothing more than continue to hide and hide from, but given that I am now free to speak for myself, and not as the spokesman for a particular organization, I will indulge this special occasion, and I welcome you to run this note in full, starting at the top.

Let me begin by saying that having worked to elect more Democratic candidates, starting way back in 1984, than Ms. Spitalnick has probably ever met, she would do well to heed my political advice when it's offered. That is, if her sincere interest is getting Democrats elected, and not, as it appears to be, selfishly promoting a counterproductive agenda-driven and self-congratulatory group that effectively tarnishes Democrats with the taint of a tainted organization.

NEWSFLASH - dateline 1990s: It's no longer brave to say you are for a two-state solution. And everyone is pro-peace.[...]

Democratic candidates should not give Republicans any opportunity to challenge their pro-Israel credentials, yet Jstreet does just that. The average, minuscule amount of support Jstreet claims to pass to their endorsees will again and again be offset by the grief and cost even the most pro-Israel candidates expose themselves to by associating with a group proven to be as duplicitous, deceitful and outright dishonest they have been exposed to be.

It is as simple as the difference between an asset and a liability.

If Jstreet believes they are helping pro-Israel Democrats get elected, then their understanding of the electorate is as bad as their other ideas, like opposing sanctions on Iran for two years in a coalition that included apologists for the Iranian regime like NIAC, or partnering with Churches for Middle East Peace - one of the major forces behind the Boycott, Divestment and Sanction (BDS) campaign that seeks to isolate, demonize and ultimately erase Israel. Maybe that's where Jstreet caught the fleas.

The more we learn about Jstreet, as the things they tried to hide and keep secret see the light of day, the more we should worry about candidates with competitive races getting anywhere near them. Virtually every reporter in the last three years who has spoken to Jstreet has been lied to. How many members of Congress have gotten the same treatment? These aren't questions that come from nowhere. They are the direct result of Jstreet's conduct and pattern of deception.

Jstreet made very clear that their #1 targeted race this cycle was the Senate contest in Pennsylvania. "There's no question that this race is a very important test of what kind of support J Street and its supporters can deliver," they said. Well, we all know how that turned out. In a race as close at that one, the Democratic candidate chose to repudiate his signature on a Jstreet initiative, and his ties to the group provided a major opening for his Republican opponent to contrast his support for Israel with the Democrats' ties to what was identified as "an anti-Israel organization," a description apparently accurate enough that when the ad making that statement was challenged by the Sestak campaign, it remained on the air.[...]

There is an old saying that asks, "How can you tell they are lying?" Answer: "Their lips are moving." Its been said a lot, by a lot of people lately (see above links) that whenever Jstreet speaks they misrepresent, attempt to deceive and lie. Well, for the record, it is true in this case as well.

The first words Jstreet says to you are false. In what appears to be a clumsy attempt to smear me somehow by putting words in my mouth and attributing to me a description of me, as a "partisan Democrat," that comes from someone else, they stumble again. While I don't describe myself that way, as most informed people who know the meaning of the phrase and read the original item can tell, "partisan Democrat" means staunch Democrat. And a staunch, and proud Democrat I am. That is why, like Alan Dershowitz and tens of million of other Americans, I am Jstreet's worst nightmare: A proud pro-Israel American, an original Progressive, a staunch Democrat, who knows the difference between truth and lies, and between hostile-to-Israel, ambivalent-to-Israel, anti-Israel, and actually being pro-Israel."

Nicely said, Josh!

Mitch McConnell STILL WON'T Compromise

The disgraced senior senator of Kentucky, Mitch McConnell, is spewing the same crap that he did the other day while talking with the media.

NBC First Read:

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said Thursday that he expects some Democrats –- wary that continued support for Democratic policies will cost them re-election in 2012 -- will "peel off" from their caucus to work with Republicans for the next two years.

“I think the most interesting thing to watch in the next Congress is how many Democrats start voting with us,” McConnell said.

“Every one of the 23 Democrats up [for re-election] in the next cycle has a clear understanding of what happened Tuesday,” he said. “I think we have major opportunities for bipartisan coalitions to support what we want to do.”

The First Read article is not the one that scares me. It's this one from the Wall Street Journal:

An emboldened Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell isn’t in the mood to compromise following the party’s historic gains in the House.

The Kentucky Republican is expected to tell a conservative audience later today that the White House can either “change course, or they can double down on a vision of government that the American people have roundly rejected.”

Mr. McConnell’s comments come a day after President Barack Obama said at a televised news conference that he was willing to work with Republicans on taxes, education, energy and a moratorium in earmarks.

Mr. McConnell is prepared to deliver his response today. According to excerpts of a speech to the Heritage Foundation, he plans to say: “When the administration agrees with the American people, we will agree with the administration. When it disagrees with the American people, we won’t. This has been our posture from the beginning of this administration.”

He says, “If the administration wants cooperation, it will have to begin to move in our direction.”[...]

Mr McConnell listed some areas where the GOP will seek change, starting with health care. The plan: force votes, “repeatedly.”

“We can’t expect the president to sign it,” he says. “We’ll also have to work, in the House, on denying funds for implementation, and, in the Senate, on votes against its most egregious provisions.”

The Republican leader says “oversight will play a crucial role” to prevent the administration from issuing regulations in areas they can’t pass legislation. He says the party “will vote to freeze and cut discretionary spending.

“We will fight to make sure that any spending bill that reaches the Senate floor is amendable, so members can vote for the spending cuts Americans are asking for,” he says. “We will push to bring up and vote for House passed spending rescission bills.”

In the excerpts, Mr. McConnell emphasizes the GOP plan for “following through on the wishes of the American people,” one that “starts with gratitude and a certain humility for the task we’ve been handed.”

“It means sticking ever more closely to the conservative principles that got us here. It means learning the lessons of history. And, above all, it means listening to the people who sent us here.”

And Mr. McConnell isn’t about to apologize for his remarks that the Republicans’ top priority should be defeating Obama two years from now.

“Over the past week, some have said it was indelicate of me to suggest that our top political priority over the next two years should be to deny President Obama a second term in office,” Mr. McConnell says. “But the fact is, if our primary legislative goals are to repeal and replace the health spending bill; to end the bailouts; cut spending; and shrink the size and scope of government, the only way to do all these things it is to put someone in the White House who won’t veto any of these things. We can hope the President will start listening to the electorate after Tuesday’s election. But we can’t plan on it.”

First and foremost, 113 of Republicans that got elected or re-elected to the House of Representatives on Tuesday were backed by the tea party movement which is a step to the right as opposed to the center.

Does Senator McConnell forget that it was the Treasury Department that first suggested the bailouts while GEORGE BUSH was President? Does he have amnesia or something?

RIP: George "Sparky" Anderson

Baseball lost another Hall of Famer. Sparky Anderson died today at the age of 76. As manager of the Cincinnati Reds, Anderson won two World Series championships when they went back to back in both 1975 and 1976. Later, as manager of the Detroit Tigers, he won his third ring in 1984. May he rest in peace.

Readily identified throughout the game simply by his nickname, George Lee Anderson was the first man to manage a World Series champion in each league. He steered the Big Red Machine to victory against the Red Sox in the wonderful and rain-protracted seven-game Series in 1975 and to a sweep of the Yankees the following October. Eight years later, his Tigers team won 35 of its first 40 games, led the American League East wire to wire and won seven of eight postseason games. The '76 Reds, the only team in the divisional-play era to sweep a postseason, remain the last NL team to repeat as World Series champions.

Anderson left the game following the 1995 season and was inducted into the Hall of Fame -- he is depicted on his plaque wearing a Reds cap -- in the summer of 2000. His 2,194 regular-season victories rank sixth all-time, his .545 winning percentage fifth all-time among those who have managed at least 3,000 games. His Reds won at least 92 games in seven of nine seasons, producing 210 victories in 1975-76. His Tigers teams averaged 91 victories from 1982-1988. The '84 team won 104 games before its postseason rampage.

He finished his career with seven division championships, five pennants, a .631 postseason winning percentage and with this distinction: he was the only man to have the most career victories for two franchises. His career in the dugout was far more successful than his brief run as a player -- one season, 1959, with the last-place Phillies, in which he batted .218 with 34 runs batted in and 12 extra-base hits, none of them home runs, in 477 at-bats.

Anderson's family announced Wednesday that he had been placed in hospice care due to complications from dementia. He hadn't been well for some time, but he had remained content, grateful and generous even in the face of severe illness.[...]

His final on-field appearance in Detroit was in 2009, during ceremonies marking the 25th anniversary of his World Series champion team. Nearly all his players made it back, many of them -- from Kirk Gibson to Alan Trammell to Lance Parrish to Jack Morris to Brookens -- returning to see fans show their appreciation for the former manager.[...]

For all he did for the Tigers, Anderson felt a debt of gratitude to the Reds and, in particular, former club president Bob Howsam, who hired him to manage in 1970, shortly after Anderson had accepted a job as a coach with the Angels in the offseason. He had five years' experience as a manager, all in the Minor Leagues. Hence, his preference to be inducted into the Hall of Fame as a Red.

Anderson is a member of the Reds' Hall of Fame, and the No. 10 uniform he wore from 1970-78 has been retired in his honor.

He is beloved in the Queen City. "He never has a harsh word for anyone. He was always gracious to the fans. He's a very special person in how he relates to people and how they relate to him," longtime Reds announcer Marty Brennaman said Wednesday after learning of Anderson's failing condition. "I compare him to Joe Nuxhall, eminently successful people with no ego at all. Their popularity is off the charts because they were so good to people.

"Sparky would look you in the eye, answer all your questions. It was as if you were the most important person in the world to him. Knowing him for 37 years, it was not an act. People could wonder if it wasn't the real George Anderson, but it was. He loves people. He laughs easily and has a great sense of humor. He's just the kind of person that anybody with a semblance of celebrity would aspire to be like."

As a manager, Anderson was "one of the all-time greats," Brennaman said. "I laugh at anyone who says they could have managed those Reds teams. The hell they could.

"There were a lot of egos in that clubhouse. They had to find a way to make it work before they got on the field. There were players like [Pete] Rose, [Johnny] Bench, [Tony] Perez and [Joe] Morgan -- all superstars. They made it work. He could manipulate a pitching staff better than anybody around. The proof is in the pudding. After he left Cincinnati, he won in Detroit."

Rand Paul and Israel

If Rand Paul is anything like his father, he will be one of the worst friends of Israel in the United States Senate.

Bill Moyers on Money

Bill Moyers gave a speech at Boston University before he election but it was published on Truthout yesterday. As Blue Bluegrass writes, just selective quoing will not do it justice.

Here we are now, on the verge of the biggest commercial transaction in the history of American elections. Once again the plutocracy is buying off the system. Nearly $4 billion is being spent on the congressional races that will be decided next week, including multi millions coming from independent tax-exempt organizations that can collect unlimited amounts without revealing the sources. The organization Public Citizen reports that just 10 groups are responsible for the bulk of the spending by independent groups: “A tiny number of organizations, relying on a tiny number of corporate and fat cat contributors, are spending most of the money on the vicious attack ads dominating the airwaves” – those are the words of Public Citizen’s president, Robert Wiessman. The Federal Election Commission says that two years ago 97% of groups paying for election ads disclosed the names of their donors. This year it’s only 32%.

Socrates again: To remember a thing, you must first name it. We’re talking about slush funds. Donors are laundering their cash through front groups with high-falutin’ names like American Crossroads. That’s one of the two slush funds controlled by Karl Rove in his ambition to revive the era of the robber barons. Promise me you won’t laugh when I tell you that although Rove and the powerful Washington lobbyist who is his accomplice described the first organization as “grassroots”, 97% of its initial contributions came from four billionaires. Yes: The grass grows mighty high when the roots are fertilized with gold.

Rove, other conservative groups and the Chamber of Commerce have in fact created a “shadow party” determined to be the real power in Washington just like Rome’s Opus Dei in Dan Brown’s “The DaVinci Code.” In this shadow party the plutocrats reign. We have reached what the new chairman of Common Cause and former Labor Secretary Robert Reich calls “the perfect storm that threatens American democracy: an unprecedented concentration of income and wealth at the top; a record amount of secret money, flooding our democracy; and a public becoming increasingly angry and cynical about a government that’s raising its taxes, reducing its services, and unable to get it back to work. We’re losing our democracy to a different system. It’s called plutocracy.”

That word again. But Reich is right. That fraction of one percent of Americans who now earn as much as the bottom 120 million Americans includes the top executives of giant corporations and those Wall Street hedge funds and private equity managers who constitute Citigroup’s “plutonomy” are buying our democracy and they’re doing it in secret.

That’s because early this year the five reactionary members of the Supreme Court ruled that corporations are “persons” with the right to speak during elections by funding ads like those now flooding the airwaves. It was the work of legal fabulists. Corporations are not people; they are legal fictions, creatures of the state, born not of the womb, not of flesh and blood. They’re not permitted to vote. They don’t bear arms (except for the nuclear bombs they can now drop on a congressional race without anyone knowing where it came from.) Yet thanks to five activist conservative judges they have the privilege of “personhood” to “speak” – and not in their own voice, mind you, but as ventriloquists, through hired puppets.
Does anyone really think that’s what the authors of the First Amendment had in mind? Horrified by such a profound perversion, the editor of the spunky Texas Observer, Bob Moser, got it right with his headline: “So long, Democracy, it’s been good to know you.”

You’ll recall that soon after the Court’s decision President Obama raised the matter during his State of the Union speech in January. He said the decision would unleash a torrent of corrupting corporate money into our political system. Sitting a few feet in front of the president, Associate Justice Samuel Alito defiantly mouthed the words: “Not true.”

Not true? Terry Forcht knew otherwise. He’s the wealthy nursing home executive in Kentucky whose establishments is being prosecuted by Attorney General Jack Conway for allegedly covering up sexual abuse. Conway is running for the Senate. Forcht has spent more than $l million to defeat him. Would you believe that Forcht is the banker for one of Karl Rove’s two slush funds, American Crossroads, which has spent nearly $30 million to defeat Democrats?

To Jack Conway: Keep on Fighting for Kentuckians

I was there last Wednesday at the GOTV rally over at the Metro Democratic Club meeting. I was there on Thursday in Frankfort at the Kentucky Democratic Party headquarters for another rally following a few hours of volunteering at the Conway headquarters. I was there on Friday putting in a few more hours. I was there on Sunday walking for Jack's campaign. I was there Monday night on the eve of election at the University of Louisville to support the Democratic candidates and to see President Clinton. I was there on Tuesday watching Jack Conway address supporters at the Downtown Mariott in Louisville. As Jack stated himself, we haven't seen the last of him.

I remember meeting Jack Conway back on March 8, 2002 like it was yesterday. Somehow the conversation got around to talking about the Duke-UNC basketball game which was being played later that day as apart of the ACC Men's Basketball Tournament. If I recall, Jack was going to be speaking to labor workers during the game.

As I commented back in November 2005 following Jack's announcement to not seek a rematch against Anne, I knew he was going places.

When Greg Stumbo decided to run on a gubernatorial slate with Bruce Lunsford in 2007, Jack Conway stepped up to the plate and ran for Attorney General. Of course that was after Congressman Ben Chandler decided he was happy in Congress and would not run in 2007.

It came as no surprise that I endorsed Jack Conway when he announced for the Attorney General's race in 2007.

When Jack announced his candidacy for the United States Senate race, I immediately endorsed him as soon as I heard. If I wasn't in Chicago at the time, I would have been at the Ali Center where he kicked off his campaign.

This line was one of those that stood out at the time: "It's not where you went to school, it's what you do with your education."

The results that we saw on Tuesday night were not the results that we would have liked but they are the results that we saw. People will argue that the ad was what screwed the campaign...I tend to agree with Jack that it was all the outside spending from the likes of Karl Rove.

So many of you opened your homes, hearts, and arms to our campaign, and Elizabeth and I are truly grateful for that. We just fell short of our goal. In this campaign, we were outspent by outside Republican groups by a margin of nearly 5-1. Their millions of dollars in largely undisclosed, special interest money shaped this race. We cannot let the same thing happen to other Democrats across the country. That is why I will remain committed to meaningful campaign finance reform and doing something about the effects of that awful court decision in the case Citizens United.

The outside money did not help. The Republican tidal wave did not help. Daniel Mongiardo waited way too long before endorsing Jack and even then, it was a lukewarm endorsement.

My only regret during the campaign was not doing enough. I had a massive thesis paper for grad school that went from May into the end of July before working overtime in August to make up for all those long Jewish holiday weekends in September. I did what I could during the last weekend of the election but it was too little, too late.

I know Jack Conway will keep fighting for us because that's what he did when he ran for Congress in 2002 and that is what he has been doing as the Attorney General.

Kentucky needs Jack Conway as much as we need him. I thank Jack for his service to the Commonwealth and for his continued service as Attorney General. I look forward to casting my vote for him for his probably re-election campaign in 2011.

I do seem to recall another guy that lost his first race for Congress and then was elected Attorney General of Arkansas before going to the governor's office. I wonder what happened to him...

Democrats in Kentucky: It's Time to Step Up

While Democrats across the state don't see eye to eye on everything, it's clear that the party needs to get with it. State Representative Larry Clark is not deserving of any leadership position in Frankfort.

So, if people like Bob Babbage, the Browns, Jerry Lundergan and other big dogs around the Commonwealth really care about moving Kentucky forward? It’s time to step up and launch a public campaign aimed at keeping Clark out of leadership in the house. Republicans and Democrats need to come together on that front immediately. Put aside partisan issues and work for progress. I KNOW Kentuckians can come together when the future is at stake. I’ll keep holding my breath.

On a related note: This shows just how weak Steve Beshear is at the moment. He has no KDP machine. And his allies in the house are even more weak. Hopefully his people will wake up before it’s too late.

When Jerry Lundergan was recently chairman prior to the 2007 elections, I remember in 2005 when he was able to bring a lot of big Democratic Party names to this state and raised money for the party. Dan Logsdon needs to step up his game as he head into the statewide election primaries. In one way or another, the Democratic Party needs to be united going into the 2011 general election. We can't do that without a strong Democratic turnout that is mobilized by the state party.

Howard Dean's chairmanship in the party did bring the 50 State strategy. It was Chairman Dean's goal to make sure there was a congressional candidate in all congressional districts. In future House and Senate races, we need to challenge the Republicans with strong candidates at the state and federal levels.

To Dr. Daniel Mongiardo--this is the time to take on Hal Rogers in the 5th district in 2012!

We NEED to take the State Senate and power away from Dictator Williams once and for all. Until he starts allowing for Kentucky to progress and help the horse industry, I'll continue to refer to him as Dictator David Williams.

Governor Steve Beshear's Statement on Election Results

Governor Steve Beshear released a statement as follows:

"Despite the clear discontent of voters across the nation, I am pleased that Kentuckians saw fit to return Ben Chandler and John Yarmuth to Congress, elect Greg Fischer as mayor of Louisville and keep Democrats in charge of the State House of Representatives. Yesterday voters expressed their clear frustration with the continuing economic downturn, a frustration I share. It is time for Washington to refocus its efforts on getting people back to work, balancing the budget and reducing the size of government -- just like I have been doing for the past three years right here in Kentucky. Today the election is over, and elected officials of all sides must put partisan politics aside and come together for the betterment of Kentucky families."

The Alaska mess

It could be weeks, maybe even months, before we even find out as to who won the Alaska race for the United States Senate.

With 432 of 438 precincts reporting, 41 percent of the voters had filled in the write-in oval on their ballot. Most of those likely wrote in incumbent Sen. Murkowski, who spent over $1 million telling voters to "fill it in, write in" after she lost to Miller in the Aug. 24 Republican primary.

But it won't be clear for weeks at least how many of the voters wrote in Murkowski's name, and how many did it properly enough to be counted. Republican nominee Miller, who ran on a tea party platform with the backing of former Gov. Sarah Palin, was pulling in 34 percent of the vote. Miller was followed by Democratic nominee Scott McAdams, who had about 24 percent of the vote.

No one has been elected to the U.S. Senate as a write-in candidate since Strom Thurmond in 1954. That's also the last time the Giants, known as the New York Giants in those days, won the World Series. The now-San Francisco Giants took the title Monday night. But it's going to be a long wait to see if Murkowski was victorious as well.

Josh on Palin

Josh gives his take on how Sarah Palin lost the Senate for the Republicans.

It makes sense to be pretty careful in judging how things will affect Sarah Palin. But there's a decent argument that this is not a great night for her. Think about if Sharron Angle and Christine O'Donnell hadn't won their primaries. There's a decent chance Dems would have lost the Senate tonight. That's a pretty big deal. She also made a late endorsement of John Raese in West Virginia. He got crushed. And perhaps most importantly, she went to war in a big way with her state's senior senator, Lisa Murkowski. She got her beat in the Republican primary. But now it's looking like Murkowski's quite likely to win as a write-in, which is usually pretty much impossible to pull off.

DNC Fail

I got mail TODAY from the DNC. President Barack Obama was asking for money for the DSCC. Only problem? They deadline stamped on there was October 29th. The day written on President Obama's letter? September 27th.

It only just arrived on November 3rd. Who is the genius responsible for this MASSIVE FAILURE?!? If I had recieved it in time, I would have considered donating a few bucks.

2011 Kentucky Statewide Primary Election - Democratic Candidates

I'll update this as I hear things come in. I've listed Attorney General Jack Conway as it is currently assumed that he will run for re-election. No word yet on when he will file. The deadline to file is January 2011.

Governor/Lt. Governor
Steve Beshear/Jerry Abramson (incumbent)
Otis Hensley/Richard Robbins

Secretary of State
Alison Lundergan Grimes
Elaine N. Walker

Attorney General
Jack Conway (incumbent)

State Auditor
Adam Edelen

State Treasurer
Todd Hollenbach (incumbent)
Steve Hamrick

State Agricultural Comissioner
B.D. Wilson
Robert Farmer
Stewart Gritton
David Williams

Kentucky Election Turnout

Registered Voters: 2,885,775
Ballots Cast: 1,411,788
Voter Turnout: 48.92 %

Hall of Fame Manager Sparky Anderson in hospice care

Sad news to report for baseball fans. Hall of Fame manager Sparky Anderson is currently recieving hospice care. My thoughts are prayers are with him, his family, and all those people that are fans of his.

ESPN:

Former Detroit Tigers and Cincinnati Reds manager Sparky Anderson has been placed in hospice care at his Thousands Oaks, Calif., home for complications resulting from dementia.

Anderson family's said in a statement Wednesday they appreciate the support and kindness that friends and fans have shown throughout the Hall of Famer's career and retirement.

No further details were released.

Anderson guided the Tigers to a World Series title in 1984 and led them for 17 seasons. He won four National League pennants with the Reds, including back-to-back World Series titles with the "Big Red Machine" in 1975-'76.

He was inducted into the Hall of Fame as a veterans committee selection in 2000.

Anderson was the first manager to win more than 100 games in a season in the American and National leagues. He has 2,194 career wins.

Anderson, a regular visitor to Detroit-area events supporting a charitable foundation he established in 1987, appeared at a reunion of the 1984 Tigers in 2009.

"Think about this now, there will be four or five of these guys together again, maybe, but never all together again," he said at the time, according to the Detroit News. "I'm 75. I know I ain't going to make it."

Election Night

Lexington elected Jim Gray as Mayor.

Kentucky sent both John Yarmuth and Ben Chandler back to Congress.

Sadly, Jack Conway lost his race for the United States Senate but he will keep fighting as Kentucky's Attorney General.

RIP: Robert Matthews

Former Kentucky Attorney General Robert Matthews has died at the age of 87. May he rest in peace.

According to a news release from the law firm Greenebaum, Doll & McDonald PLLC, where he once practiced, Matthews “set the standard for what all lawyers should strive to be. He was knowledgeable of the law and a skillful advocate, while always being professional, civil and respectful of all.”

Robert F. Matthews Jr. began his career in state government in 1948, when he served as a special assistant attorney general for the Department of Revenue for two years.
He was named an assistant attorney general in 1955 and elevated to first assistant attorney general four years later.

He also was named assistant chief administrative assistant for former Gov. Bert T. Combs, and commissioner of finance before being elected attorney general in 1964.
In 1967, Matthews ran for lieutenant governor but was narrowly defeated by Wendell Ford in the Democratic primary.

President Bill Clinton campaigns for Jack Conway

I was at tonight's rally over at the Grawmeyer Oval at the University of Louisville. I'd estimate that I was one of the first six but definitely within the first ten. As such, I was right up in the front row straight in front of the podium.

Speakers included Mayor Jerry Abramson, State Senator Gerald Neal, Governor Steve Beshear, Louisville Mayoral candidate Greg Fischer, Congressman John Yarmuth, Attorney General (and Senate candidate) Jack Conway, and President Bill Clinton.

Below are photos that I took.

Louisville Mayor Jerry Abramson:


Kentucky Governor Steve Beshear


Louisville Mayoral candidate Greg Fischer


Congressman John Yarmuth


Attorney General Jack Conway and President Bill Clinton