L.A. Progressive:
By Dick Price and Sharon Kyle —

The several political or at least politically tinged events we attended this week showed us that the momentum for change is running fever pitch here in Los Angeles. Clearly, chickens have come home to roost for the woeful Bush Administration and the failed right-wing policies supporting it. Democratic candidates up and down the slate stand to benefit.

Lined Up on the Sidewalk in Pasadena
At Friday night’s opening of Pasadena’s United Democratic Headquarters (UDH), folks were lined up six deep on the sidewalk out front on Lake Avenue to hear the likes of LA County Democratic Party Chair Eric Bauman, Congressional candidate Russ Warner, and State Senate candidate Carol Liu rally the overflow crowd.

John Gallogly, our friend on the UDH steering committee, said that fund-raising for the headquarters has gone so well that his powerful group is considering supporting a “Red Counties” strategy, renting buses to take precinct walkers from Pasadena out to Palmdale or Riverside or other outlying regions to help Democratic candidates win races in traditionally Republican districts.

“Look at all these people. We’ll get more volunteers than we can use here in Pasadena,” John said. “If we could pick a couple places not too far away, we could make a difference there, too.”

Our Northeast Democratic Club is working on opening its headquarters in Highland Park. Tony Scudellari and club president Bill Rumble are selecting a location, probably somewhere on Figueroa Avenue, and heading up fundraising efforts. Although our section of Los Angeles is about as blue as blue can be, turnout is often quite low—just 7% for one recent city council race. Rather than pursue a “Red States, Red Counties” strategy, our club will focus on engaging more of the local populace in the electoral process.

Already, several key Democrats — Assemblymembers Kevin de Leon and Anthony Portantino, LA Councilmembers Ed Reyes and Jose Huizar — have kicked in to fund the headquarters, but there are fewer deep pockets here than in Pasadena, so we’ll need to rely on smaller home-based fundraising parties.

Stepping on the Roses in Lafayette Square
Thursday night, we attended a barbecue for State Assembly Speaker Karen Bass, hosted by Reggie Jones-Sawyer, whose spacious lawn was packed with Democrats from throughout Southern California. Organizers were expecting 50 guests, and the turnout was easily double that.

Sharon ran into Linda and Bobby Jones, old friends from two decades ago when they organized BAPAC — Black American Political Association of California — in the San Fernando Valley. Linda, a school board member in Palmdale, is running for the open Assembly seat in the 36th Assembly District—one of those traditionally Republican strongholds that are in play in this very hopeful year.

Bobby, a high school teacher and minister in Palmdale, says the Bush Administration’s mortgage crisis, soaring gas prices, and economic downturn have hit his region especially hard. “Even with the long commute, lots of people moved out there because they could afford to buy. But now every block has an abandoned house,” he said. “People are looking for a change — people who wouldn’t have thought to vote for a Democrat in the past.”

We eagerly signed up to help Linda’s campaign, either by organizing a fund-raiser here in Mt. Washington or by getting a bus full of precinct walkers out to her district.

While at the event, we ran into another candidate for the California Assembly, John MacMurray. MacMurray is running in the 72nd A.D. This north Orange County district has a growing Democratic population but he could use some help. If you are in that area, lend a hand.

We also ran into Cynthia Loo and Lori Ann Jones, two Superior Court candidates we’ve come to know in recent months. Sharon is halfway through her law studies at the People’s College of Law — where Cynthia serves as a volunteer law professor — and our surveys have shown that LA Progressive readers are especially thirsty for information about judicial races. Because we support these two candidates, we’re planning a fund-raising event for them as well. Look for more on that in coming weeks.

Around the political speeches, we also talked with Henry Vandermeir, president of the California Democratic Council, and Ahjamu Makalani, Brad Parker, and David Sonnenborn from the state party’s Progressive Caucus about ways we can ramp up our work on the CDC’s newsletter and support communications for the Progressive Caucus.

The Rub
The Rub, of course, is time. We’ve both got pretty demanding day jobs and kids to raise and commutes to make. In this fabulous year, with its real hope for fundamental political change — yes, we know Obama supported the FISA bill, but we think we know why, too — we could find progressive political activities to occupy our every single waking moment. (Friends do ask if we ever sleep.)

But we think we’ve got something going here with the LA Progressive, something that both feeds our own burning need to support change in our society and also — at least to judge from the response we get everywhere we go—supports others in making that change happen.

So, we’ll keep looking for ways to leverage our e-zine and weekly digital newsletter, forming alliances and recruiting new writers wherever we can (check out our new Florida correspondent, Dick’s Dad).

We also will keep looking for ways to make this enterprise at least pay for itself. You see on our website that we’ve got Google and Amazon ads in place, but we’ll need lots more traffic to the site for that to cover our costs. We’re also thinking of approaching compatible progressive political candidates and officeholders for display ads on our site and in our newsletter. It seems that they might want to reach our audience.

In the meantime, we’re having a ball — though we’ve just agreed that one night a week, each and every week, will be “romance night.” Just us. No email. No articles. No phone calls. So don’t bother us that night, whichever night that turns out to be.

Dick Price & Sharon Kyle
Editor & Publisher, LA Progressive

Think Progress:

This afternoon, Nancy Pfotenhauer, senior energy adviser to Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) and a lobbyist for Koch Industries, lied to MSNBC’s David Schuster, claiming, “We withstood Hurricanes Rita and Katrina, and we didn’t spill a drop.” She said:

When Senator McCain opposed lifting the ban in the past, it was because there were concerns about environmental capability. Like, could we do this and still maintain a pristine environmental um uh climate and and area around the drilling? And basically, what we’ve seen is the technology has progressed to the point where we could do that. We withstood Hurricanes Rita and Katrina and didn’t spill a drop.

Watch it:

Pfotenhauer — who spent her career in Washington defending the right-wing polluter Koch Industries before joining the McCain campaign — is repeating a popular right-wing lie. The hurricanes, unsurprisingly, caused 124 offshore spills and hundreds more onshore. Like Sen. McCain (R-AZ), Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-CA), Gov. Bobby Jindal (R-LA), Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne, Mike Huckabee, George Will, and Bill O’Reilly, Nancy Pfotenhauer is lying.

Crooks and Liars

John McCain has flip-flopped on so many subjects that he would feel quite at home in my toddler’s tumbling class. Keith Olbermann recounts McCain’s flip-floppery on Political reform, Immigration, Gay marriage, Abortion, Nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain, Military actions against rogue states, Negotiating with Kim Jong Il, Negotiating with Castro, Warrantless wiretapping, Torturing Detainees, Indefinitely holding detainees, Iraq War, Tax cuts for the rich, Estate tax, Privatizing Social Security, Balanced budget, Windfall profits tax, Offshore drilling, Bush fundraisers, Jerry Falwell, Pastor John Hagee, MLK Jr. holiday, South Africa divestment, the confederate flag, and alternatives to evolution being taught at school

Negotiating with terrorists (acceptable in 2002 when Powell went to Syria. In 2006, McCain said sooner or later we’ll talk to Hamas, not appropriate now)

Unilateral action against suspected terrorists in Pakistan (Confused leadership with Obama, not with Bush)

Feeling dizzy yet?

Der Spiegel:

Barack Obama, the man most Europeans would like to see elected the next US president, plans to visit Berlin, Paris and London soon. The Democratic candidate is looking for statesmanlike images to boost his campaign and German politicians will be hoping some of his popularity rubs off on them.

What will the new US president mean for Europe? And above all, what will he want from Europe? A group of Europeans and Americans recently engaged in heated debate on the subject on the sidelines of a trans-Atlantic conference at California’s Stanford University.

Charles Kupchan, the former top advisor to Bill Clinton and one of America’s best experts on Europe, gave a less than euphoric assessment. What will happen, he asked his audience, if the popular Barack Obama comes to Europe as US President and demands much more help in Afghanistan or Iraq? How will the Europeans respond?

These difficult questions won’t arise in earnest until next year at the earliest but German politicians will soon be able to meet Barack Obama in person. The Democratic contender made a surprise announcement at the weekend that he plans to visit Europe during the election campaign. In addition to Paris and London, he also intends to visit Berlin.

“France, Germany and the United Kingdom are key anchors of the trans-Atlantic alliance. And I look forward to discussing how we can strengthen our partnership in the years to come,” said Obama.
Continue Reading »

Brave New Films imagines what birth control options women would have if a Senator with a zero rating from Planned Parenthood and NARAL ProChoice America were elected President. Watch it:

Think Progress:

Last week, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) sought to excuse his constant and vociferous cheerleading for the Iraq war in 2002 and 2003 by claiming that “every intelligence agency in the world” believed that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction:

I know why I supported [the war] because I believed Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction as did every intelligence agency in the world and every assessment.

Unfortunately for McCain, the Senate Select Intelligence Committee released the final two sections of its report today on the White House’s use of prewar intelligence, which proves the wide discrepancies between war hawks’ claims and intelligence available at the time. Chairman Jay Rockefeller said his committee “has concluded that the Administration made significant claims that were not supported by the intelligence”:

In making the case for war, the Administration repeatedly presented intelligence as fact when in reality it was unsubstantiated, contradicted, or even non-existent. As a result, the American people were led to believe that the threat from Iraq was much greater than actually existed. … Sadly, the Bush Administration led the nation into war under false pretenses.

The report also notes that pre-war statements by Bush administration officials “regarding the postwar situation in Iraq” — including Vice President Cheney’s infamous declaration that the U.S. would be “greeted as liberators” — “did not reflect the concerns and uncertainties expressed in the intelligence products.”

Like Cheney, McCain was not shy about assuring Americans that we would be “greeted as liberators.” Right before the war began, McCain told MSNBC’s Chris Matthews that “absolutely” a “large number of Iraqis” will “treat us as liberators“:

MATTHEWS: Are you one of those who holds up an optimistic view of the post-war scene? Do you believe that the people of Iraq or at least a large number of them will treat us as liberators?

MCCAIN: Absolutely. Absolutely. [Hardball, 3/12/03]

In fact, the Senate Intelligence report on pre-war statements specifically notes a pre-war intelligence report that directly refuted this claim. A January 2003 Intelligence Community Assessment acknowledged that “Iraq was a deeply divided society that likely would engage in violent conflict unless an occupying power prevented it.”

Update: In a statement, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) said that the Senate Intel report confirms that “the Bush Administration engaged in a misleading marketing campaign to rush the country to war.”

Update: Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), a member of the Intelligence Committee, said in a speech today that it “rots the very fiber of democracy when our government is put to these uses.”

Update: Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR) is also calling for a full review of congressional testimony by former Defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld.

Think Progress:

During his speech before the American-Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) touted the success of America’s divestment campaign from South Africa’s racist apartheid regime and proposed a similar policy towards Iran:

We should privatize the sanctions against Iran by launching a worldwide divestment campaign. …Years ago, the moral clarity and conviction of civilized nations came together in a divestment campaign against South Africa, helping to rid that nation of the evil of apartheid. In our day, we must use that same power and moral conviction against the regime in Iran, and help to safeguard the people of Israel and the peace of the world.

Years ago, McCain lacked the “moral clarity and conviction” to consistently support divestment from South Africa. Despite voting to override President Reagan’s veto of a bill imposing economic sanctions against South Africa in 1986, McCain voted against sanctions on at least six other occasions:

– 1985: Voted To Recommit Anti-Apartheid Act To Foreign Affairs Committee Postponing Sanctions Against South Africa: McCain voted to postpone for one year the imposition of any sanctions against South Africa, permitting the president to waive the sanctions if he determined that the African National Congress had not renounced violence. [HR 1460, Vote 129, 6/5/85, Failed 139-282, D 7-238; R 132-44; I 0-0]

– 1985: Voted To Allow U.S. Firms Continue Investing In South Africa: McCain voted to let U.S. firms continue investing in South Africa if their units comply with a code of worker rights. [HR 1460, Vote 110, 5/21/85, Failed 148-256, D 3-227; R 145-29; I 0-0]

– 1985: Voted Against Requiring Immediate Withdrawal Of U.S. Investment From South Africa: McCain voted against imposing a total ban on U.S. exports to South Africa. [HR 1460, Vote 128, 6/5/85, Failed 77-345, D 77-167; R 0-178; I 0-0]

– 1985: Voted Against Establishing A Commission To Study Apartheid In South Africa And To Recommend Sanctions: McCain voted against establishing a commission to study apartheid in South Africa and to recommend what sanctions the United States should impose on the government. [HR 1460, Vote 126, 6/5/85, Failed 108-310, D 6-235; R 102-75; I 0-0]

– 1985: Voted Against Imposing Sanctions Against South Africa: McCain voted against imposing sanctions immediately against South Africa. [HR 1460, Vote 130, 6/5/85, Passed 295-127, D 239-6; R 56-121; I 0-0]

– 1986: Voted Against Considering Imposing Economic Sanctions Against South Africa: McCain voted against providing for House floor consideration of the bill to impose economic sanctions against South Africa. [HR 4868, Vote 159, 6/18/86, Passed 286-127, D 238-4; R 48-123; I 0-0]

McCain’s schizophrenic voting record on divestment undermines his lofty campaign rhetoric and moral platitudes. McCain was as slow to recognize the importance of “helping to rid that nation of the evil of apartheid” as he is quick to consider bombing Iran.

TPM

During his press conference today in Baton Rouge, John McCain declared in strong terms that he’s voted for every investigation of Hurricane Katrina.

The only problem, as the DNC has been pointing out to reporters, is he voted twice against Democratic proposals to investigate the levee failures.

After a local reporter at his Baton Rouge press conference asked why he voted against forming a commission to investigate the levee failures in New Orleans, McCain insisted that he supported every investigation — and added that he was “not familiar” with what the reporter was talking about:

McCain voted against establishing a commission to investigate the levee failures, in a September 2005 party-line vote in which all Republicans voted against the Democratic proposal. He then repeated that party-line GOP vote against a similar Dem proposal in February 2006.

Late Update: McCain spokesman Brian Rogers e-mailed us the following comment:

“It doesn’t bode well for Senator Obama’s pledges to run a campaign of hope and change when on the first day of the general election he’s launching the same tired negative attacks that the American people are so sick and tired of. As Sen. McCain said, he wasn’t familiar with the specific votes the questioner was asking about. Instead he was speaking to his strong support for the Homeland Security Committee’s comprehensive, bipartisan investigation of Hurricane Katrina, which was already fully underway when these other proposals were suggested.”

ST. PAUL, Minn. — Cheered by a roaring crowd, Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois laid claim to the Democratic presidential nomination Tuesday night, taking a historic step toward his once-improbable goal of becoming the nation’s first black president. Hillary Rodham Clinton maneuvered for the vice presidential spot on his fall ticket without conceding her own defeat.

“America, this is our moment,” the 46-year-old senator and one-time community organizer said in his first appearance as the Democratic nominee-in-waiting. “This is our time. Our time to turn the page on the policies of the past.”

Clinton praised Obama warmly in an appearance before supporters in New York, although she neither acknowledged his victory in their grueling marathon nor offered a concession of any sort.

Instead, she said she was committed to a unified party and would spend the next few days determining “how to move forward with the best interests of our country and our party guiding my way.”

Obama’s victory set up a five-month campaign with Republican Sen. John McCain of Arizona, a race between a first-term Senate opponent of the Iraq War and a 71-year-old former Vietnam prisoner of war and staunch supporter of the current U.S. military mission.

And both men seemed eager to begin.
Continue Reading »

Wired

If elected president, Senator John McCain would reserve the right to run his own warrantless wiretapping program against Americans, based on the theory that the president’s wartime powers trump federal criminal statutes and court oversight, according to a statement released by his campaign Monday.

McCain’s new tack towards the Bush administration’s theory of executive power comes some 10 days after a McCain surrogate stated, incorrectly it seems, that the senator wanted hearings into telecom companies’ cooperation with President Bush’s warrantless wiretapping program, before he’d support giving those companies retroactive legal immunity.

As first reported by Threat Level, Chuck Fish, a full-time lawyer for the McCain campaign, also said McCain wanted stricter rules on how the nation’s telecoms work with U.S. spy agencies, and expected those companies to apologize for any lawbreaking before winning amnesty.
Continue Reading »