Community hearing on racial and ethnic profiling being held this evening.
Posted using ShareThis
Monday, March 29, 2010
Saturday, March 20, 2010
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
Wednesday, February 03, 2010
PA Progressive Summit 2010: Impressions of the Specter vs. Sestak Senate Primary Debate
You can watch the entirety of the debate on PCN here. It does require you to poke around some though. Its probably worth the effort.
The PA Progressive Summit 2010 was held in Harrisburg Jan. 29 through Jan. 30, more information here. The "debate" between House Rep. Joe Sestak and current Democratic Party Sen. Arlen Specter was held Saturday night.
Here are my random impressions, more or less.
One: It wasn't really a debate between the candidates, but a moderated session where Joe Sestak appeared first and then answered questions from the audience. Then Joe left the stage and Arlen Specter, choosing to stand perhaps to show his "vitality", also answered questions for about 45 minutes. Verdict: points to Specter. And: who designed this format? What Sestak should want is face to face encounters with Specter, who at times, looked to be a very old man. This format didn't allow for contrast or even intelligent follow up questions. Its quite clear that Joe would have had some followup questions.
Two: Keep in mind that I endorse Joe Sestak. Joe Sestak is relatively young and, so far, the most progressive legislator/former admiral I have ever seen. There are few issues that I disagree with when it comes to Joe Sestak and I'm assuming that's he's getting very good advice from Chris Bowers of Open Left , who's been advising him. So if its a close call I would probably say Joe Sestak. Unfortunately, because of the format, this seemed to be more of a personality contest. I think Specter wins that confrontation every time. He came off warm and gracious. By the way, just a personal note of observation learned from watching senators closely for about 30 years: Senators tend to be superior politicians and generally very likeable. They have to have a talent for making you like them even when they're acting against your interests. (Former Senator Barack Obama is exhibit A. and more on that Republican smackdown later...)
Three: Labor has always been in the tank for Arlen Specter. I first heard rumors back in the 80s that Specter had essentially bought off Labor's leadership. When I worked for America Coming Together in 2004 we were downstairs from Joe Hoeffel, who was running against Arlen Specter for that senate seat. For some reason, it never occurred t our organization to support Joe Hoeffel, who was better and still remains better on almost all progressive issues, especially labor's. Just to recap: America Coming Together was pretty much run by the American labor movement. I suppose it could have been an ethnic decision. Both Andy Stern (SEIU reps were operating out of our office...) and George Soros are Jewish. That's not a good reason to base your political decision making on. I imagine that's why labor's power seems to be in a permanent decline. I mean, Obama didn't support the African American governor of New York just because he was African American. Then again, perhaps that's just a reflection of how weak African American political power is compared to Jewish American political power. For the record, Barack Obama is supporting Arlen Spector in the Democratic primary for senate. In a wishful way, I'd like to think that he would do the same for David Patterson if he was a senator and he needed a 60th vote. Yet a small yet insistent voice in my gut tells me "No he wouldn't."
Four: Light of hope: there haven't been a lot of labor endorsements for Specter. Of course, Joe Sestak needs more than just labor not endorsing Specter. Joe Sestak needs labor's enthusiastic backing. Rendell and Obama have sown up most of the establishment Democratic Party endorsements for Specter. This is a long list. Labor can't sit this one out. I'm trying to imagine how Sestak could match Specter's ground game without an enthusiastic labor base and my imagination fails. I say that as an aspiring science fiction writer. Let's hope that Sestak doesn't get the 2004 Joe Hoeffel treatment from the American labor movement.
Five: Here's some advice for Joe Sestak: if and when 
he gets an opportunity to debate Specter he needs to politely but insistently question him on his positions. I thought Specter had two bad moments during the debate where he played the decent elder statesman of stature. Someone had asked him a legitimate question about his record and he showed, I thought, a disturbing flash of anger that reminded me of Montgomery Burns of Simpson's fame. It just seemed quite unseemly. That wasn't a guy who would get my vote, at least for 10 seconds anyway. For the record, I also thought Specter's 2nd worst moment was when he danced around ending the filibuster in the senate. It was clear that he hadn't an answer or more than likely didn't want to end the Senate's powergrab supermajority. He should have said either yes or no. He kind of danced around and didn't really answer the guy's question. Here's a question for Sestak: "Would Specter support the nuclear option in the senate if it meant passing a public health care plan that had a public option? Or any other meaningful legislation?"
Six: I don't care if Specter gets a zillion endorsements. A Specter vs. Toomey race means an unenthusiastic democratic base vs. a justifiablly enthused republican base. I just don't see an old and tired Arlen Specter beating Pat Toomey in the general election. And now Specter's vote doesn't seem to be as important.
Not change we can believe in, again.
Some quick impressions of PA Progressive 2010 Democrat gubernatorial debate.
I watched all four of the remaining Democratic Party nominees debate last night at the Pennsylvania Progressive Summit 2010. The debaters included Allegheny County Commissioner Dan Onorato, Montgomery County Commissioner Joe Hoeffel, Scranton Mayor Chris Doherty and Pennsylvania Auditor General Jack Wagner.
Quick Impressions
- I think Onorato will probably win it because he's raised the most money, a whopping 8 million dollars. That's just the way it is in our very corrupt country. There's no Santa Claus, either. I don't think anybody else is even close. The only other number that I've even seen is Joe Hoeffel's, which is about a measley 400000. Despite this, I have to say that the best informed of the candidates on policy issues seemed to be Dan Onorato. I like, and this is very important to me after watching the Dems in action at the national level over the last 8 months or so, Hoeffel the most but I just don't think you can pull off a victory when you're being outspent 20 to 1.
- Scranton Mayor Chris Doherty, who seems like a likeable guy with a likeable family (and lots of 'em. Six kids I think...) just didn't look ready for primetime as a professional political speaker. Politicians have to speak well, especially if they're being outspent by a zillion dollars. He also had the worst moment of the night when answering a question about Marijuana legalization. First, he said, and I'm paraphrasing, that he would continue to lock people up for the crime. But he also spoke about the "Drug Menace" and seemed to imply that Crack and Heroin and Marijuana were somehow equal things when in fact they're clearly not. No one is arguing that Crack has medicinal value.And the more he spoke about how evil the evil drugs were, kind of like that "Drugs are bad mmmmkay" guy on South Park, the audience started to reply with boos and some low level hissing. I just don't see him winning the nomination.
- Wagner had the second worst moment of the night when he danced around a question by Planned Parenthood. The question made a lot of sense and kind of went like this: if Roe v Wade is overturned (kind of likely since they just overturned much older 100 year precedent in that gawdawful Citizen United corporations are people too case...) would he veto the likely bill that would arrive at has desk criminalizing abortion and subsequently women and their lawbreaker doctors. He simply didn't give a straight answer. He should have said that when the Pennsylvania legislature gives him a law that will recriminalize abortion in the state that he would sign it, and probably sign it proudly. He's a longtime pro lifer. Not this evasive nonsense about supporting the current law and nebulous talk about protecting the "children". Disgraceful. Related: Both Chelsa Wagner and her husband Khari "Mr. Mom" Mosley were there as well. I dropped lit for Ms. Wagner and I'm very proud of her sensational work as a state rep. I've known Khari for years and respect his politics. But, if they weren't related to Jack Wagner by blood and/or marriage there is no way that they would be supporting his campaign. It would be either Onorato of Hoeffel as the imaginary diety is my witness.
- Even though I mentioned the inevitability of an Onorato win in a bad way, I don't think Onorato would be a bad governor. In fact, I think he would be a pretty good governor. It would probably be a continuation of the Ed Rendell regime, which wasn't bad. We just have to watch out to make sure that Dan doesn't try to sell our state highways to rich folks.
I"ll have more later since I'm attending the summit.
Friday, January 29, 2010
Sunday, January 24, 2010
Wednesday, January 20, 2010
Sunday, January 17, 2010
Friday, January 15, 2010
Monday, January 11, 2010
Thursday, January 07, 2010
Wednesday, January 06, 2010
Wednesday, December 30, 2009
Tuesday, December 29, 2009
Monday, December 14, 2009
Thursday, December 10, 2009
Wednesday, December 09, 2009
Saturday, November 07, 2009
Message of Tuesday's election clear: Produce or go home
I don't think these elections are necessarily indicative of the future of the Democratic Party for 2010. I do think that the lesson it draws is that people need a reason to vote. One of the frustrating things about writing on the Internet is that if you read a lot on the Internet you can always find someone who can phrase things better than you.
I think that Chris Bowers and Markos from the Daily Kos summed it up best.
The Bowers take is that it's basically the economy, stupid. 10 percent unemployment won't cut it in 2010 or 2012.
If the unemployment rate was rapidly dropping, real income was increasing, and health care was more affordable, does anyone really think Democrats would be facing any electoral worries whatsoever? The biggest flaw in the post-election spin is the tendency of politicians and pundits to consider most swing voters ideologically-driven news junkies, instead of the results-oriented, low-information participants in the political process that they are...When most voters believe their lives are getting better, then the party in power will benefit politically. Ideological abstractions about the size of government or appealing to the base don't matter quite as much. It really is, as Mike argued yesterday, about delivering the goods. I happen believe that progressive-left policies are the best way to make most people's lives better. Even if you disagree with that assessment, the smart post-election political argument for a governing party should be about what policies they can pass that will improve people's lives, not about how to appeal to voters on a more abstract level.
Markos sums up the situation this way:
Motivate the base
by kos
Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 11:10:12 AM PST
If I sound like a broken record, it's because the obvious lesson from Tuesday's elections is being lost on way too many people:
If you want Democrats to turn out and vote for you next year, start delivering on the 2006 and 2008 campaign promises. If you don't, Democrats will stay home. It's that simple.
There are, at best, even in the most conservative districts, only a handful of Democrats in the House that can survive reelection without Democratic support. The lower the Democratic turnout, the more Democratic casualties we'll have next year, and those losses will be inordinately high among Blue Dog and New Democrats. So really, it's in their best interest to see the Democrats succeed in Congress. Sure, it might p__s off their corporate benefactors, but corporate benefactors don't vote.
Conservadem logic is actually kind of funny:
Do nothing this year, so they can get reelected
So they can do nothing again next cycle, so they can be reelected
So they can stick around to name post offices and issue "National Bratwurst Day" proclamations
Inspiring!
Luckily, there are Democrats who have figured out what really happened on Tuesday.
Blaming election setbacks on a drop in voter enthusiasm, Congressional Democrats said Wednesday that losses in governors’ races in Virginia and New Jersey — and a striking House win in New York — should give new urgency to their legislative agenda, including a sweeping health care overhaul.
As they assessed the results, Democratic lawmakers and party strategists said their judgment was that voters remained very uneasy about the economy and did not see Democrats producing on the health, energy and national security changes they promised when voters swept them to power only a year ago.
"Most of us ran on that," said Representative Gerald E. Connolly, Democrat of Virginia and president of the party’s freshman class. "We must deliver. I need to give Democrats something to be excited about."
And while conservatives may not like it, the two races that centered on federal issues -- the two federal races -- were won by you-know-who.
While not discounting the Republican wins in Virginia and New Jersey, Democrats said the New York and California House races were the only contests that centered on Congressional issues and Democrats won both despite months of Republican attacks on the legislative priorities of President Obama and Congressional Democrats.
"The governors of Virginia and New Jersey don’t have a vote on the Obama agenda," said Representative Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.
Again: give Democratic voters a reason to turn out, and they will. Abandon the Democratic agenda, and they won't. And if you lose because you quit on the party and the nation? We'll cheer.
I would only disagree with that last statement. I don't think the country can handle another four years of republican rule.
Can't access www.threeriversonline.com right now...
I'm having some trouble accessing my Three Rivers Online so I'll be posting here and in my Examiner site. My service provider has trouble with "migration" issues apparently.
Tuesday, November 03, 2009
Here's the Planned Parenthood voting guide that I will be following in today's voting.
Well, I'm off to vote. To be honest, I was kinda thinking of blowing off this election (I don't live in Pittsburgh or the mayor's race would have drawn some of my interest other than my endorsement of Franco Dok Harris...) but these judge's ads made my think I need to vote against Joan Orie and the other predictably evil republican nominees to the courts.
In fact, Planned Parenthood sent me a handy voter's guide which I intend to follow to the letter where I can. Here it is:
Justice of the Supreme Court
Democrat:
Jack Panella Endorsed by Planned Parenthood PA PAC
Republican:
Joan Orie Melvin endorsed by the PA Pro-Life Federation PAC & LIFEPAC
Judge of the Superior Court
(vote for four)
Democrats:
Robert J. Colville Endorsed by Planned Parenthood PA PAC
Kevin Francis McCarthy Endorsed by Planned Parenthood PA PAC
Anne E. Lazarus Endorsed by Planned Parenthood PA PAC
Teresa Sarmina Endorsed by Planned Parenthood PA PAC
Republicans:
Judy Olson endorsed by the PA Pro-Life Federation PAC & LIFEPAC
Sallie Mundie endorsed by the PA Pro-Life Federation PAC & LIFEPAC
Temp Smith endorsed by the PA Pro-Life Federation PAC & LIFEPAC
Paula Ott unknown
Help Us Continue to Elect Pro-Choice
Candidates in Pennsylvania!
Donate Today.
Judge of the Commonwealth Court
(vote for two)
Democrats:
Barbara Behrend Ernsberger Endorsed by Planned Parenthood PA PAC
Linda S. Judson Endorsed by Planned Parenthood PA PAC
Republicans:
Patricia A. McCullough endorsed by the PA Pro-Life Federation PAC & LIFEPAC
Kevin Brobson endorsed by the PA Pro-Life Federation PAC & LIFEPAC
Pittsburgh Mayor's Race
Mayor
Democrat:
Luke Ravenstahl endorsed by LIFEPAC
Independents:
Kevin Acklin unknown
Franco “Dok” Harris Pro-choice
If this isn't clear, then it should be noted that I won't be casting a vote for anyone endorsed by LIFEPAC. Related: Here are some endorsements by Agent Ska and Maria of 2 Political Junkies.
More About: pro life terrorism · pro choice · Planned Parenthood · Franco Dok Harris · Pittsburgh's mayor's race
Franco Dok Harris is the only logical choice for the next Mayor of Pittsburgh
I really don't think this is a tough call. If its a choice between the former republican and the machine hack, then Franco Dok Harris is clearly the best choice to be the mayor of Pittsburgh. He's also taller.
Luke Ravenstahl is an uninspiring hack although he has managed to stay out of jail on corruption charges, which has surprised me, he's at heart a machine guy with no real vision for the city. Kevin Acklin, whose personal story is interesting, just decided that he's no longer a republican and is now an independent? That's like deciding you're no longer fighting for the South a year before the Civil War ends. Your timing just seems suspicious. Acklin should have just said he couldn't win as a Republican in town. I will confess this though: Acklin would probably be a better mayor than Luke Ravenstahl. I hate admitting that because I truly hate the Republican Party and anybody involved with such a fascist party ("Oh, I resigned from the American Nazi Party and all their horrible Santorum-like party candidates I endorsed. All better now.") but Acklin is clearly better and smarter than Luke. But then again who isn't.
I think Franco Dok Harris is the ony reasonable choice. We need some new blood. I also think, on paper, that Dok Harris is the best qualified person to be the Mayor of Pittsburgh. You might argue that he's inexperienced but they're all young and inexperienced.
Dok Harris has also produced superior television ads. Here's a really hard hitting ad that he's produced. I don't know if he has enough money to put them on air anyplace. This ad also showcases a rare moment of anger from Presiden Barack Obama at the end. I guess I would like to know the context of that.
His video ads seem to be focusing on African Americans. I really think that he's got a good shot if he can get most of the black vote and a good percentage of the Italian vote. This ad where he interviews a distraught African American mother...well, just watch it.
Friday, October 23, 2009
I'm temporarily making Mirror Universe my Home Page for Three Rivers Online
I have to work under the hood over at Three Rivers Online. I'm not even sure if this redirect will work consistently but I'm going to be posting here for the next week or so. I actually haven't been posting much at Three Rivers because of space limitations and, probably, laziness.
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
Planned Parenthood will be holding a downtown event today at Mellon Square at 2 PM.
Planned Parenthood is holding a downtown event at Mellon Square this afternoon at 2 pm today. Their leadership is worried that abortion and contraception rights will be stripped out of health care reform. I think they're legitimately worried.
Here's the press release that I received:
Dear PHILIP,
It's easy to think of health care reform as something that's happening far away, as lawmakers in Washington hold hearings, schedule votes, and negotiate behind closed doors. But the fact is, the decisions being made now will have a profound impact on women, men and families here in western Pennsylvania — every person, every day, for a generation or more.
That means we can't afford to sit back and let the process unfold without us — we need to take action here to make sure that health care legislation protects and expands access to health care. If we don't, there's a very real chance that the women of western Pennsylvania will be worse off after health care reform than they are now.
Will you join us for a day of action on Tuesday, October 20 at Mellon Square (6th avenue and William Penn Place)? We'll be showing our support and mobile phone banking from 2 p.m. to 3 p.m. — and we need all the help we can get. Email Volunteer@PPWP.org to let us know you're coming, or just come on out when you can.
We're not going to have another chance to get this right. As I write this, anti-choice groups are increasing their efforts to hijack reform to undermine women's health. They're going to keep trying to pressure and persuade lawmakers from now until the last vote in Congress is cast — and that means we need to keep pushing for health care reform that protects all women.
Join fellow supporters of Planned Parenthood this Tuesday at 2 p.m. at Mellon Square. The negotiations may be happening on Capitol Hill, but this is our chance to make a difference here.
Thank you for everything you do for Planned Parenthood and the women, men, and families we serve.
Sincerely,
Rebecca Cavanaugh, JD
Vice President for Public Affairs
Planned Parenthood of Western Pennsylvania
Here's the press release that I received:
Dear PHILIP,
It's easy to think of health care reform as something that's happening far away, as lawmakers in Washington hold hearings, schedule votes, and negotiate behind closed doors. But the fact is, the decisions being made now will have a profound impact on women, men and fam
Publish Post
That means we can't afford to sit back and let the process unfold without us — we need to take action here to make sure that health care legislation protects and expands access to health care. If we don't, there's a very real chance that the women of western Pennsylvania will be worse off after health care reform than they are now.
Will you join us for a day of action on Tuesday, October 20 at Mellon Square (6th avenue and William Penn Place)? We'll be showing our support and mobile phone banking from 2 p.m. to 3 p.m. — and we need all the help we can get. Email Volunteer@PPWP.org to let us know you're coming, or just come on out when you can.
We're not going to have another chance to get this right. As I write this, anti-choice groups are increasing their efforts to hijack reform to undermine women's health. They're going to keep trying to pressure and persuade lawmakers from now until the last vote in Congress is cast — and that means we need to keep pushing for health care reform that protects all women.
Join fellow supporters of Planned Parenthood this Tuesday at 2 p.m. at Mellon Square. The negotiations may be happening on Capitol Hill, but this is our chance to make a difference here.
Thank you for everything you do for Planned Parenthood and the women, men, and families we serve.
Sincerely,
Rebecca Cavanaugh, JD
Vice President for Public Affairs
Planned Parenthood of Western Pennsylvania
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)