Prog Blogs, Orgs & Alumni
Bank Slate
Betsy Devine
birch, finch, beech
Democracy for NH
Live Free or Die
Mike Caulfield
Miscellany Blue
Granite State Progress
Seacoast for Change
Still No Going Back
Susan the Bruce
Tomorrow's Progressives
Politicos & Punditry
The Burt Cohen Show
John Gregg
Krauss
Landrigan
Lawson
Pindell
Primary Monitor
Primary Wire
Scala
Schoenberg
Spiliotes
Welch
Campaigns, Et Alia.
Paul Hodes
Carol Shea-Porter
Ann McLane Kuster
John Lynch
Jennifer Daler
ActBlue Hampshire
NHDP
DCCC
DSCC
DNC
National
Balloon Juice
billmon
Congress Matters
DailyKos
Digby
Hold Fast
Eschaton
FiveThirtyEight
MyDD
The Next Hurrah
Open Left
Senate Guru
Swing State Project
Talking Points Memo
50 State Blog Network
Alabama
Arizona
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Missouri
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
The Tea Party is coming to town. Yesterday, Sarah Palin--Kelly Ayotte's biggest supporter--kicked off the Tea Party Express' national tour.
The Tea Party's final stop on their tour will be on the steps of our state house in Concord the night before the election.
Sarah Palin, Karl Rove, Glenn Beck and their friends on the Tea Party Express are working hard on Kelly Ayotte's behalf. Ayotte proudly accepted Palin's endorsement and groups like Karl Rove's American Crossroads and the Glenn Beck-backed Chamber of Commerce have spent millions of dollars to boost her campaign
Mr. Sununu's petulant comments are partisan politics at its worst. Instead of engaging in a thoughtful conversation or offering any ideas for putting New Hampshire back to work, Mr. Sununu resorted to petty political attacks and childish name-calling. He showed disrespect to the Office of the Presidency.
As I travel across the Granite State on this campaign, there seems to be one thing the people of New Hampshire can agree on - Washington is broken. It doesn't matter if you're a Republican, Democrat or Independent. You've seen exactly what I see down there: a system that is simply not serving the needs of our middle-class families and small businesses any more. A system that has become rigged against the people it's supposed to support.
That's why yesterday I announced my proposals to change the Senate rules to increase accountability and break the partisan gridlock in Washington. Right now, Washington Republicans in the Senate are blocking a vote on a critical bill that will provide tax cuts and increased credit to New Hampshire's small businesses. My plan calls for an end to anonymous holds and gradually lowering the threshold needed to end debate and hold an up or down vote on Senate bills.
(I'll have more later on Fred Malek. I took an especial interest in him during the 2008 Presidential race. - promoted by Dean Barker)
Kelly Ayotte and the Washington special interests behind her campaign are getting nervous. They're seeing the same things we are: my campaign is surging in the polls and the Sarah Palin endorsement is backfiring.
So what do they do? Launch an attack ad full of facts and figures so misleading I have a feeling they were taken straight off Glenn Beck's chalkboard. They're attacking me for standing up to the special interests and big oil companies and supporting efforts to reduce our dependency on foreign oil and address climate change.
The special interest group funding the ad, American Action, is headed by Washington insider Fred Malek, a top backer of the Ayotte-Palin team. He's a life-long K-Street Republican from Washington who wants to tell Granite Staters how to vote.
We knew this would happen. Ayotte and her special interest backers see that we're within striking distance of taking a senate seat that has been in Republican hands for the last 30 years. So they're throwing everything they can to stop my momentum. Plus, Republicans can't help themselves. They have nothing to offer this country but the failed policies of the past and nasty attacks.
For years, there's been an express train between Capitol Hill and K Street.
We have former employees of big corporations ending up in the agencies that are supposed to regulate them. We have former public servants securing high-paid jobs in the businesses they used to oversee.
That may be good for K Street, but it's bad for the American people.
Today I am announcing my plan to end the revolving door in Washington between public officials and corporate lobbyists.
I've spent a lot of time on this blog talking about how we need to end business as usual in Washington. Earlier this week, we got another disheartening reminder of what business as usual has become. Rather than stand up for the voices of the people who define and deliver democracy in this country, the Republicans in Washington resorted to political obstructionism and caved to the special interests, once again. They successfully filibustered the DISCLOSE Act, which is a crucial first step in undoing the damage inflicted by the Citizens United Supreme Court case. It would have allowed us to start closing the door on corporations trying to buy our elections.
You know what? I wasn't surprised by their filibuster. I was expecting it. I'm sure you were too.
But I think everyone here can agree - it is one sorry state of affairs that leads us to expect special interest-funded obstructionism from our public servants.
Yet another reminder of how the news landscape (and perforce, the very nature of politics) has changed in recent times can be found in today's joint release of research from the Pew Research Center's Internet & American Life Project and Project for Excellence in Journalism.
Of particular interest is the growth of the "participatory news consumer" (no news to this community, of course). Politicos ignore or dismiss these phenomena at their peril, as we well know.
The end of the year is the time for Top 10 Lists ad nauseum. Fortunately, there's nothing I like better than a good Top 10 list.
PolitickerNH has its own rundown of the top GOP and Dem rising stars to watch in 2009.
IMHO, I think it speaks volumes that over half of the Dem list is comprised of legislators and municipal leaders while three of the GOP "rising stars" lost their bids this cycle, and another three are staffers/party elders.
Nothing wrong with staff, mind you. But I think this is indicative of the great slate of candidates turned elected officials that we are sending to Concord and City Halls. Read: Dems have a better group of legislators and leaders to chose from.
Snaps to Dean for snagging the 9-spot:
9) Dean Barker: The editor of Blue Hampshire, Barker has built a progressive online community that is not afraid to criticize party leaders.
Thoughts on the respective lists? Omissions? Who else should we be watching?
The ABC/Facebook debate came at a pivotal time in the presidential primary process. Untold numbers of undecided voters in New Hampshire tuned in to this debate. Other voters may have tuned in order to reconsider their loyalties in light of the results of last weeks Iowa Caucus. But the ABC did not provide voters with a complete picture of the race. The network decided to lock Democratic candidate Congressman Dennis Kucinich out of the debate.
According to the Kucinich campaign, ABC would not allow the progressive Congressman to debate because he did not place fourth place or better in the Iowa Caucus. Kucinich emphasized the point that his campaign had decided to bypass Iowa, spending the majority of its resources in the Granite State.
The ABC lock out is particularly harmful to the Kucinich campaign in that it will leave New Hampshire voters with the false impression that their candidate has dropped out of the race. Kucinich was not the only candidate effected by ABC's decision making process. Had Joe Biden and Chris Dodd remained in the race they would have been denied a place in the debate as well. It is entirely possible that the fact they would be excluded made the decision to withdraw from the race a little easier for the veteran senators.
ABC used two other criteria in "narrowing the field" for the debate. Candidates had to have reached the 5 percent mark in at least 4 major surveys of New Hampshire voters. They had to reach the same mark in one of the last four major national surveys as well.
Voters should ask themselves why ABC should have the right to decide the criteria for "narrowing the field". That is the job of voters, not television network executives.
ABC has published a story about the events involving Kucinich and the debate on its website. I encourage readers to leave comments there:
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics...
You can also lobby a general complaint with ABC here:
I think the first couple are uncontroversial. After that it gets a bit arbitrary. Here's my list:
Civil unions made legal.
School funding constitutional amendment fails.
John E. Sununu ranked one of most vulnerable Senators.
Lynch reshapes state leadership: Safety Commissioner Richard Flynn, DHS Commissioner John Steven out.
Ray Buckley wins state Democratic Chairmanship following a smear campaign waged against him.
GOP primary imminent in NH-01; challengers to Hodes still lacking.
Jeanne Shaheen enters Senate race.
Tell-all phone jamming book appears - not yet in stores, but early recipients are starting to leak contents.
New Hampshire Primary resurgent: Florida and Michigan rebuffed, candidates hoping to skip the early states (Giuliani, Thompson) in free-fall.
You can find some of the most thorough analysis of all these events right here. If I were to add a tenth, it would be the emergence of Blue Hampshire as a must-follow web site for progressives and political fans in the state.
Last week I sent a message to Congresswoman Carol Shea-Porter, asking her to outline her position on Iran. I asked the Congresswoman if she had read the most recent National Intelligence Estimate, Iran: Nuclear Intentions and Capabilities . The findings outlined in the NIE challenge the Bush administration's claim that Iran is a country determined to develop nuclear weapons. It stated that Iran halted its nuclear weapons program back in 2003. More importantly, it noted that there is no evidence available that can prove that Iran has resumed nuclear weapons program.
I asked the Congresswoman if she would oppose military action against Iran in light of these recent revelations.
Here is the respose I received:
As a member of the House Armed Services Committee, I support having a strong national defense. However, that does not mean rushing to war without clear provocation, as we did in Iraq. The Iraq war has destabilized the region, weakened our military, and inflamed terrorist organizations worldwide. Our nation is far less safe because of the President's reckless march to war in Iraq.
We should not be naive about the potential danger from Iran, particularly if that nation should acquire nuclear weapons. However, I believe that there is no compelling reason to go to war with Iran at this time.
It is our patriotic duty, as citizens of a great democracy, to hold our leaders to the highest standards, especially in matters of war and peace. Thank you for your vigilance.
Sincerely
Carol Shea-Porter
Member of Congress
Like the Congresswoman, I believe that Iran should be prevented from attaining nuclear weapons. But military action would not be in the best interests of the United States, or the Middle East, at this time. The administration's approach to Iran's nuclear program appears to be based largely on speculation, rather than on verifiable intelligence. America should never engage in military action on such a basis.
I hope to convince other members of Congress to go on the record on this issue as well. We need to know where our representatives stand on this issue. If you live in the 2nd Congressional District in New Hampshire and are interested in contacting Congressman Paul Hodes about this matter please contact me.
David Anderson
davewanderson@care2.com
http://reasonableforeignpolicy...
Last night John Edwards talked about his plan to end cronyism and corruption in Washington. He discusses Blackwater and no bid contracts in New Orelans.
Judge Reggie Walton has ruled that I. Lewis Libby must begin serving his prison sentence immediately (well, as soon as the prison system processes the paperwork, meaning 6-8 weeks). He will not be free pending appeal.
The Massachusetts legislature serving as Constitutional Convention gave fewer that 25% of the vote to sending an anti-gay marriage amendment to the voters, thereby killing it.
A note to potential donors to the state Republican party: Remember, part of your money will be going to the state Democratic party due to the phonejamming settlement.
Now consider whether to go to their fundraiser:
State Republican Party chairman Fergus Cullen is pitching the Republican State Committee annual dinner on June 6, the day after the Presidential debate at Saint Anselm College.
In a recent memo to "Friends of the Party," he wrote that former Democratic chairman Kathy Sullivan said one reason her party did so well last November was because the GOP was "under-funded and under-staffed."
"She was right," Cullen wrote, "and that advantage continues." The Democrats have nine staff positions, "and we have two."
That's got to be a tough one. On the one hand, the NH GOP desperately needs that money. On the other hand, well, part of it will probably go to the NHDP. My heart aches for them.
