Losing one of the truly good guys

(I still don’t have the words that would do Steve justice, but I think the Adam Aleman at the Flash Report was very gracious for his thoughts on respecting — yet disagreeing — with Gilliard. – promoted by blogswarm)

blogswarm and I were just talking about Steve Gilliard, and the truth is, you really couldn’t say enough about him. He was just a guy that really, really cared. Whether that was at dKos, or at the NewsBlog, the guy really just got “it.” 

In case you missed it, Steve passed away yesterday. Unfortunately, we seem to remember the tragedies that shock us most. And they hurt the most. You just forget politics for a while and try to deal with the here and now. Like Maria Leavey, Steve left us too soon. And like Maria, if the length of life were proportional to the courage of  convictions, he would have lived to be 200.  Rest in Peace.

CA-41: Lewis Will Not Seek Reelection

In what I expect to be the first of possibly three Republican retirements in California, Robert Novak is reporting that Jerry Lewis will not seek reelection.

(Cross-posted on Daily Kos)

Republican sources on Capitol Hill and in California say Rep. Jerry Lewis, ranking Republican on the House Appropriations Committee who has been criticized on ethical grounds, will not seek a 16th term next year.

Lewis came under fire last year for pouring millions of dollars worth of earmarks into his heavily Republican southern California district. He has not apologized and vigorously defended himself behind closed doors in the House Republican Conference.

Before we celebrate I should note that this is a pretty red district and we won’t have an embattled Lewis to run againt, but with California likely to go blue for President next year, perhaps we can score sn upset with a strong candidate. The trick now, is to find the candidate. Any suggestions for that candidate?

Come to the Tustin Chili Cookoff, See Us at Obama OC!

Mmmm, mmm, yummy! Today is the day… FOR THE TUSTIN STREET FAIR AND CHILI COOKOFF! Come to charming Old Town Tustin, eat some delicious chili, and enjoy the live entertainment. Oh yes, and visit our Obama OC booth! We’ll be registering new voters and telling folks about what’s happening locally with Barack Obama’s campaign. Please feel free to drop by and say hi! : )

So come on over and find us on El Camino Real. And if you have any friends who need to registered to vote, bring them over as well! What better way to make a difference and be a force for positive change on lazy June Sunday than to eat chili and get people ready for the election? : )

Jane Harman and Iraq — Against the Supplemental (But Not Really)

(So did Joe Klein actually get it right (kinda sorta)? Did Jane Harman plan to vote “Yea” before doing a “Nay”? I really don’t know, but Pete has an interesting theory. – promoted by atdleft)

crossposted at Daily Kos

OK, more than a week has passed since the Iraq supplemental vote, and I’m pretty dumbstruck that the incongruity of Jane Harman’s vote against the bill and her statements to Joe Klein of Time magazine about the vote hasn’t gotten more attention. 

Here’s the deal —

According to Harman, as told to Klein*:

1. Voting against the supplemental bill was voting against providing troops the equipment and the armor they need.

2. Voting No was not something she could bring herself to do because of her view noted above.

3. She voted against the bill in the end not because she changed her view noted above in 1., but because she says she felt it was her responsibility to vote how her anti-war constituents wanted her to vote.

Well, so what does all this mean?

1.  Harman was aware that the bill would pass at the time she switched from a Yes vote to a No vote. 

There’s a second source on this one: Politico says she changed her mind “shortly before it came to the floor”.  As far as Klein and Harman, I’m guessing she authorized Klein to say she’d already voted, which suggests the vote was very imminent.

2.  Her press statement criticizes an argument as false that she believes to be true. 

Namely, the “you’re endangering our troops if you vote no” argument.  The same day her press release was put out calling such an argument “manipulation” and “rubbish, she  made that exact argument to defend a “Yes” vote and she still stands behind that argument today(despite voting No on the bill).

3.  Based on 1. and 2. above, it’s reasonable to assume she reconciled herself to voting No on the bill and switched because by that time she knew it was going to pass and her vote wasn’t needed

Surely the fact that it would also help protect her from the wrath of constituents reeling from multiple military deaths was a motivating factor too. 

Sadly, this evening, the front page of the local South Bay newspaper website had four main stories on its front page – every single one of them about a local soldier’s death.

Friends, fellow Americans line Torrance streets to mourn a passing warrior
Wilmington soldier killed in Iraq by a roadside bomb
Death of Spc. Alexandre Alexeev is third from South Bay in two weeks.
Everyone came to pay their respects to a South Bay son
Services Sunday for Pfc. Daniel Cagle of Del Aire

The whole screen has no other articles in view.  They are all about local soldiers dying. 

Digby is right when he suggests that this dynamic must have played a part with Harman switching, but he gives credit to Harman where I think it very well could be a Lieberman-esque effort at “window dressing”.  Harman knew by that time what the outcome would be, and this dynamic isn’t getting her to change her thinking, only how she’s voting when it doesn’t make a difference. 

4.  If her vote would have actually made a difference in the outcome, there’s no way in hell that she would have voted against the supplemental because she  believed (and believes) to do so would lead to soldiers’ deaths. 

She  contrasts herself with all the anti-war folks who wanted a No vote on this blank-check bill: She is concerned in soldiers’ welfare; they are not.

I had those kids on the C-130 [deploying to Iraq] in my mind, but I also had to consider the overwhelming opposition to this war in my district–and, in the end, my responsibility was to the people I represent.

5.  Harman played absolutely no beneficial role in getting this blank-check supplemental defeated because she was for it until the very last minute, and even then personally disagrees with how she felt she had to vote.  For all we know, she was working behind the scenes to get people to vote for it.

‘* A note about relying on Harman’s statements as reported by Joe Klein on his Time magazine blog:  Klein gets things wrong.  A lot. And what Harman is reported as saying is pretty outlandish – I mean, Klein’s got her saying that she voted for a bill that she voted against, and implying that her very own vote is going to lead to the death of some American troops.  Couldn’t be possible, could it?

But consider: Klein posted a followup a day later and transcribed a voice mail he says he received from Harman in which she vouches for the accuracy of their conversation as Klein reported it. 

[…]
Your account of our conversation was accurate and I stand by what I said to you.
[…]

Also, consider how damaging these statements are to her credibility and the fact that her press office made no effort to clarify the record. (How many days has it been since the vote?)  And I personally talked to Harman’s press secretary and made sure he was aware of what Klein had quoted Harman as saying.  He was very aware and yet declined the opportunity to dispute any of it or point me to anywhere where they had previously disputed it.

Isn’t it reasonable to assume that the only reason Harman is not doing anything to correct the record about what Klein reported her as saying – is because she actually said it?

I think I’m bending over a little backwards to be fair to Harman — it’s not like I’m pretending to read nefarious thoughts into her mind.  These are things she said on the record which got published by Time magazine.  The onus is really on her to correct the record if anything is wrong, and nothing suggests she’s done that.  But if there’s something out there that’s not available online that for some reason Harman’s office is not sharing on this, please share in the comments.

Frankly, I’d be happy to find out that Klein did in fact get it wrong but Harman is protecting his errors until and unless she starts paying a price for what he wrote.  But it’s got to be one or the other:  Either Klein is simply making up things Harman said or Harman is being super-disingenuous on her Iraq war vote.

Scandalicious Saturday Night Open Thread Spectacular!

It’s over! It’s over! It’s finally over! The Liberal OC has the last word on the crazy rumor about the Nancy Pelosi fundraiser, and the Republican spinners at OC Blog have clearly failed in their attempt to create civil unrest among Orange County Democrats. Horray, the non-scandal has died! ; )

OK, and now for more scandaliciousness… Bill O’Reilly now claims that the liberals have declared war on the white, male Christians! Cheese louise, when will these crazy right-wing folks learn to stop stirring up s**t over non-scandals?!

So what “scandals” are happening in your neck of the woods? What non-issues are the Republicans trying to stir up in your area? And is Bill O’Reilly crazy, or is he just talking nonsense? Go ahead. Make my day. Fire away! : )

Huge land use battle in Monterey

(Good introduction to one of the most significant issues on the Tuesday ballot. – promoted by Robert in Monterey)

In Monterey County, a special election on June 5 will shape the future of California’s Central Coast.

This year, the developer-friendly Monterey County Board of Supervisors approved a general plan that would allow 100,000 new housing units to be built over the next 25 years.  The plan would open 4,900 acres of farmland to development, and allow large new subdivisions in rural areas.

Open-space advocates have come up with their own Community General Plan that would channel development into existing cities such as Salinas, Seaside, and Monterey, and into five community areas: Pajaro, Castroville, Boronda, Chualar, and Fort Ord.  It would also require permanent water supplies to be identified before houses are built.  This spring, activists gathered 16,000 signatures and placed the Community General Plan on the ballot in a special election.

The result has been a huge battle of developers vs. environmentalists and local residents.  Hundreds of thousands of dollars have been raised and spent on both sides.  The Los Angeles Board of Realtors just sent $150,000 to defeat the initiative.  The Monterey County Republicans have also been active, spending $50,000 on a voter registration drive, likely targeted at Latinos.

The election will be on June 5, and is expected to be extremely close. 

The Yes on A (Community / open-space plan) folks are doing GOTV phonebanking this weekend through Tuesday, June 5 and could use some help.

The campaign office hours are Sunday 1-8pm, Monday & Tuesday, 10am-8pm.   For more information, call the field office in Salinas at 831-758-2509 or Carmel at 831-274-2646.

Progressives Forfeit, Gavin Newsom Re-Elected by Default

Ouch. Talk about anti-climatic. Speech after speech on how it is critical to challenge Gavin Newsom and elected after elected unwilling to run. It was surreal.

(more after the jump)

The last two speakers were Ross Mirkarimi and Chris Daly. The huge crowd was chanting “Run Ross Run” and interrupted his speech on multiple occasions for the chant. Yet he said he wouldn’t run. An audience member challenged him, yet he still wouldn’t run.

Then Daly got up, talked about how crucial it was and told the story of the Golden State Warriors and held up his ‘I Believe’ sign. Just when it seemed he was ready to announce, he said something like “we’ll get it done” and just walked of the stage while “I need a Hero” played and everyone looked at the people next to them in disbelief. It really was surreal. I mean, WTF?

Everyone should now realize Daly was right a full month ago when he said a candidate would have needed to announce two weeks ago to have a chance. That didn’t happen, it didn’t happen today and the whole ordeal was nothing but comedy.

OK, it was more than comedy, there was great networking and important plotting on lots of issues. And Supervisor Jake McGoldrick gave a thunderous speech to kick of his campaign against the fringe group trying to recall him.

It is probably time for people to realize Newsom is going to be mayor for 4 1/2 more years and adjust strategy accordingly. Progressives need to focus on the legislative branch and the ballot box. And on those fronts there were some great conversations today.

But overall, it ended with a huge letdown. It was like being at a concert with lead guitar just wailing out a solo and right at the crescendo the sound system blows.

UPDATE: This morning’s paper:

Tired of waiting for candidates to decide whether to take on the mayor — whose own re-election campaign is chugging along — Supervisor Chris Daly called for a convention, taking place today, to find a challenger.

But whether any of the better-known progressives will announce their candidacy at the Tenderloin meeting is unknown, and Daly said if no one else does by the end of the day, he will.

“Much to my wife’s chagrin,” added Daly, who said anyone who wants a realistic chance of beating Newsom needs to start campaigning now.

Forfeit, indeed.

—–

Again, here’s a (partial, probably incomplete) list of the bloggers in attendance and whose sites you should visit for more commentary:

Sasha, Luke Thomas and Elaine Santore, H. Brown, Pat Murphy, Paul Hogarth, Gavin Watch (assumed), Chris Daly, SF Mike, SF Party Party, Poor Magazine, Greg Dewar, Josh Wolf, Tim Redmond, Rita

—–