My Big Fat Democratic Convention

For reasons unclear to me, I was unanimously elected chair of the Senate District 22 caucus, divided almost exactly evenly between Clinton and Obama delegates. The two camps tried to cobble together a deal to divide the available committee positions between them, but it nearly foundered as many of the first-time delegates (probably a majority of the total) were understandably suspicious of "back room deals." In spite of that, and a brief bit of childish public tantrum-throwing by a delegate who didn't get what he thought he deserved, we actually finished far ahead of the other senate districts, some of which were at it all night long and well into the morning. I attended a hastily-organized Native American caucus and we elected a Navajo man and a Blackfoot/Lakota woman (I'm sorry, but I've blanked on their names) as our choices for at-large Native American delegate to the national convention. We also passed a resolution I authored calling for the repeal of the Major Crimes Act and reversal of Oliphant, though I never learned what happened to it after that. There was little actual drama on the convention floor compared to prior years; Boyd Ritchie was easily re-elected. The question of abolishing the "Texas Two-Step" Primary was fobbed off on a task force. The biggest excitement came when we had to evacuate the Austin Convention Center (which is easily the worst venue I have ever been trapped in; we practically had to rappel up the side of the building to get to some of the meeting rooms and the escalators were unaccountably turned off) due to a fire alarm. I heard but didn't get to see Chelsea Clinton's speech, and the entire convention was annoyed by the technical glitches that kept interrupting Hillary Clinton's concession speech. As for the much-hyped tension between Clinton & Obama supporters, I think there were actually more people worried about it than there were people who legitimately intend to vote for McCain unless Clinton is put on the ticket. Overall, my impression was that the Obama supporters could have been more gracious winners and the Clinton supporters could have been better losers. A few small symbolic gestures by either side would've gone a long way. For example, if I was in charge of the Obama delegates, I would have arranged for a "spontaneous" pro-Hillary demonstration after her speech. It would have cost the Obama side nothing, but would've helped mend fences. Actually, Texas would've been the perfect setting for a joint appearance, considering the huge turnout and the fact that Clinton won the primary while Obama won the caucus. Hopefully, the Texas Democratic Party will capitalize on the huge primary turnout and work to make sure that all the new people in the process stay excited and involved all the way to November and beyond.

Post Convention Stress Disorder

Still recovering from the Democratic State Convention. Longer post to come. While it's true that the Convention was interrupted by a fire alarm (and then, bizarrely, someone tried to burn down the Governor's Mansion), as I have often said, any Democratic meeting where no shots are fired, no blood is spilled and no police are called is a good meeting.

The Candidate

Congratulations, Senator! Now the hard part begins. As for me, I'll be at the State Democratic Convention in Austin tomorrow through Saturday. I will attempt to post from there, but we all know how well technology and I get along.

ATTENTION DEMOCRATIC VOTERS!

To the disturbingly large number of you who say you'd rather vote for John McCain than any Democrat other than your first choice, I put it to you that such an action would be stupid on a cosmic scale.

Exhibit A: This man (who incidentally was one of the only 5 votes that counted in picking our current president) thinks it's perfectly okay for your government to torture you.

Thank you. You may now return to your regularly scheduled fratricidal bloodletting.

Stop the Madness!!

Oh when will all this wickedness end?
I'm not one of the Chicken Littles who think the protracted primary campaign is dooming the Democrats (it's not, polls reflect that it's not, and there are some benefits) but this endless slogging is frankly getting tiresome. At some point, somebody, somewhere is going to have to say to somebody: it's over.

I Voted for Hillary Clinton...

...but this reeks of duplicity and desperation. Given that there is no way to sucessfully challenge enough delegates to give the majority of the caucus votes to Clinton, what's the point? We already have the media jackals cackling over "Chaos in Texas"; why in hell would you give them (and the Republicans) more ammunition? I tend to hold with those who say the extended primary battle is ultimately good for the party, increasing turnout and excitement, but also I would add allowing the candidates to air out any potential dirty laundry early in the process, before McCain/Rove gets to it. If Obama is the nominee, when would you rather have the Jeremiah Wright story break? Now? Or August? But this kind of pointless shit-stirring by the Clinton camp is counterproductive; it doesn't help her, but more to the point, it doesn't help the Party.

Marching Backwards

House Republicans use procedural tactics to delay nearly every single piece of legislation that comes up. How long do you think it will be before John McCain starts railing about the "do nothing Democrat Congress"? Be sure to share this knowledge with any liberal friends who bleat to you about how the Democrats have "done nothing" since taking control of Congress.
On the plus side, former Speaker Denny Hastert's old seat has been won by a Democrat in the special election.
And speaking of House Republicans, Cong. Steve King (R-Iowa) is an idiot. Further updates as events warrant.

Send Lawyers, Guns & Money...

...the shit has hit the fan. The Clinton and Obama campaigns are threatening to sue if they don't get their way in the Texas primary? Both campaigns deny it, as you would expect. If this threat is real, it is just about the stupidest thing I can think of.

Texas Blue?

A good column from Paul Burka on the outstanding turnout in the Democratic Primary and the possibility of renewal for Texas Democrats. Put me in the "cautiously pessimistic" column on that. If we see a new Blue trend, it will have less to do with Democratic competence than (as at the national level) GOP incompetence, cupidity and arrogance. Also, Democrats will have to depend on a high level of Republican ennui, which isn't really a strong foundation for a re-alignment. In decreasing order of likelihood, I could see A) winning a statewide judicial race; B) winning control of the State House; or C) Rick Noriega beating Cornyn.

Last Legs?

I generally agree with this post from the Great and Powerful Kos; although, even assuming she carries Ohio and Texas, the Clinton campaign has some serious image problems that could dog her in the fall, namely the image that Obama is running circles around her, that she's the past and he's the future, etc. etc. It looks as though an endorsement by John Edwards is imminent, and that should help some; if nothing else it could reassure nervous superdelegates and party bosses. Not sure I agree with Paul Krugman that Obamania is approaching Kim Jong Il levels of personality cultism, nor do I think this primary battle is really as nasty (from a historical perspective) as he suggests, given the large numbers of Democrats who say they'd be happy with either nominee. Bottom line? Democrats need to get a candidate, and fast. The wind may be at our backs, but McCain is no pushover and I would be astonished if the Right Wing Howler Monkey Media Chorus doesn't rev itself up to full volume against whoever ends up leading the party into battle.

Harry Reid Grows Spine!

Vows to preserve last remaining shred of Constitution. Film at eleven!

aaaaaaand we're screwed. Again.

Senators Feinstein and Schumer will vote for the nomination of Michael Mukasey to be Attorney General, evidently based solely his vague, off-the-record assurance that the President would actually have to obey a law banning "waterboarding." Of course, this is the same Mukasey who, as a federal judge, ruled that the President has the authority to arrest US Citizens on US soil and lock them up for the rest of their lives without ever charging them with a crime.
I have painstakingly defended this Democratic Congress, pointing out that in many cases they lack the votes to accomplish what many want of them in terms of reining in this lawless Administration. But if this is the best we can hope for, confirming a nominee just because he's "not Alberto Gonzales," even though his views on the apparently limitless bounds of Presidential power are completely indistinguishable with those of Gonzales, then what is the point of having a Democratic majority in the first place?

UPDATE: Guess which country prosecuted as war criminals enemy soldiers who used waterboarding on Allied POWs during WWII? Go on, guess!

UPDATE 2: But Condi Rice's legal advisor would apparently have let them walk.

Blue Tide

E.J. Dionne, Jr. writes about a trend that hasn't hit Texas yet: the blue-ing of the suburbs and exurbs. He also picks up on a historical meme I have mentioned before: the Republican Party's gentrification into a sullen regional party, much like the Democrats from 1870 until 1932.

Meet The New Boss...

...Same As The Old Boss? The Democrats are having a hard time living up to their promises on ethics reform.
And, shockingly enough, Republicans are making hay over the Speaker's assinine decision to put William Jefferson on the HOMELAND SECURITY COMMITTEE! See what happens when you don't listen to me?

Mr. Manners Sez:

If your approval rating is in the Richard Milhous Nixon Memorial Sub-Basement, and you are trying to get in good with the new leaders of Congress who have no reason whatsoever to like or support you, stop deliberately mis-prononouncing the damn name of the majority party!

UPDATE: Bush attributes the gaffe to "Texas" and his inability to speak English.

The Solid South

Interesting piece from the Economist, via The Moderate Voice, concerning the shrinkage of the GOP down to its Deep South base. If this trend continues, it would mark a fascinating reversal of history. From 1865-1964, the Democratic Party was defined almost exclusively by "The Solid South," and not very competitive anywhere else, certainly not nationally (the Democrats won a grand total of four Presidential elections from 1860 until 1932, and even then had only two winning candidates; and you could well argue that 1912 was a fluke).

UPDATE: Kevin Phillips, via Washington Monthly, calls this the "Texification" of the Republic Party. That hurts, but it's probably sadly accurate, given the paleolithic nature of the Texas Republican Party Platform.

UPDATE 2: Matthew Yglesias respectfully dissents. Good, thoughtful comments, too.

Column for 19 November, 2006

“If you remain in Me and My words remain in you, ask whatever you wish, and it will be given you.”
--John 15:7

Okay, so now what? The dog has caught the car, Charlie Brown has kicked the football, and the Democrats have retaken Congress. Sing, hallelujah! Of course, there are some discouraging signs that the Democrats didn’t quite get the memo that this election was about the corruption, stupid. The battle for House Majority Leader is between Steny Hoyer and Jack Murtha, both good people and (in Murtha’s case) courageous, but both have tin ears when it comes to ethical issues. And Alcee Hastings, formerly impeached, convicted and removed as a federal judge, as chairman of the House Intelligence Committee? Yes, there were some problems with his impeachment, but that’s not the point. By winning on corruption, the Democrats will now be held to a double standard and will be raked over the media bonfire for ethical lapses that barely made the news scroll when Republicans did them. Get over it, guys. And get used to it. Besides, I have a simple solution to both problems. Make Silvestre Reyes (D-El Paso) chair of the Intelligence Committee and Lloyd Doggett (D-Austin) Majority Leader. Reyes is smart and a former Border Patrol agent. Doggett has the political skills to keep Blue Dog moderate Democrats from teaming up with the Republicans to thwart the narrow Democratic majority. Of course, by the time you read this, it will be readily apparent that nobody in Washington is listening to me, but then, if Nancy Pelosi has one thing in abundance right now, it’s free advice from pundits. The advice ranges from “stay moderate, don’t do anything stupid,” to “impeach them all, let God sort them out!” to “don’t go nuts, but bash the Republicans with their own hammer.” This last argument, which I tend to agree with, is that Democrats should push an aggressive but not stupid agenda of items with broad public support and should feel free to use the same strong-arm tactics Republicans used to shut them out of virtually all Congressional debate for the last twelve years. President Bush will, of course, veto some or all of this. Great. Let him. The Presidential election of 2008 will then be like Harry S. Truman’s legendary 1948 run, only in reverse; a hard-working Congress bashing a “do nothing” White House. It’s really all about laying the groundwork to get a Democrat elected President. With that in mind, and since Christmas is coming, I now present my own little wish list for our new Democratic overlords in Congress: 1) Public Financing of Congressional campaigns. I hate this idea, but it’s the only alternative left as long as the Supreme Court insists that money equals speech; 2) Abolish electronic voting without a paper trail. In order for democracy to work, people have to be able to trust that their vote will actually be counted and right now, they don’t; 3) Mandate once-per-decade redistricting by non-partisan panels with no regard for protecting incumbents. Schwarzenegger was actually right on this issue. And, in fact, I think a good argument can be made that Congress can simply impose this reform using its’ Constitutional authority under Article 1, Section 4; 4) Repeal the foul-smelling Patriot, Warrantless Wiretap and Legalized Torture Acts and start over from scratch. We do need laws to help combat terrorism, but these acts are all abominations and an affront to very spirit of liberty this country was founded on; 5) Expand subsidized national health care for children on the CHIPs model. It’s time we really did start putting children first; 6) Implement lifetime free medical care for all honorably discharged veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts, regardless of length of service. It is the very least we can do for them; 7) Implement by legislation the provisions of the Kyoto Accords on climate change. God demands it. And our grandchildren will curse our names if we fail to take action to slow down global warming; 8) Impose a lifetime ban on lobbying for all members of Congress and their staff. If you are only marking time in government service until you can get out and get rich, you have no business being there in the first place; 9) Ban all gifts to members of Congress of any amount. No golf vacation junkets, no meals in fancy restaurants, not even a stick of gum; 10) Abolish ear-marking, the coward’s way to pork barrel politics; 11) Repeal NAFTA and withdraw from the WTO (World Trade Organization). “Free trade” as it is currently practiced is neither “free” nor “fair”; we’re being played for suckers by our economic competitors in the world and our own treacherous corporations, who are systematically destroying the American economy and converting us back into a colony. Is that “protectionism”? Darn right it is. Corporate special interests should not be allowed to con us into allowing foreign corporations to eviscerate our economy; 12) Re-impose Clinton Era proscriptions on environmental exploitation in the National Parks. We are robbing our children and grandchildren by denying them at least some unspoiled wilderness to enjoy; 13) Revive a New Deal proposal to allow Indian tribes to administer certain public lands. This would have the dual benefit of protecting the environment and alleviating the crushing poverty on many remote reservations. I would begin with turning over the Black Hills (the Sacred Paha Sapa) to the Sioux, part of the Great Smoky Mountains to the Cherokee and the Grand Canyon to the Navajo. Hmm, well, I notice that the longer my list got, the less and less politically realistic it became. Oh well. That’s what wish lists are for, right?

Our House Is A Very, Very, Very Fine House

Historically speaking, the Murtha vs. Hoyer fight is probably nowhere near as big a deal as the media are making it out to be. But the media double-standard for Democrats illustrates once again why Alcee Hastings should NOT be chairman of the Intelligence Committee, a point on which the Bluedogs and I both agree, though I'm still holding out for Silvestre Reyes.

UPDATE: Harman is out, and probably a good thing under the circumstances. Hastings would still be worse, though.

UPDATE 2: Silvestre Reyes may have some problems of his own, though not nearly as bad as, say, getting impeached and removed from the bench for corruption.

The Ten Wise Men

Both Democrats and George W. Bush seem to be placing an awful lot of faith in the Iraq Study Group, the long-anticipated "Blue Ribbon" Panel (decidely thin on Middle Eastern Credentials) composed of James A. Baker, III, Lee Hamilton, Vernon Jordon (in case the President of Iraq faces a sudden "bimbo eruption"), Edwin Meese (in case the Iraqis need advice on incompetence and corruption in their Justice Ministry), Leon Panetta, Lawrence Eagleburger, Alan K. ("Stick it in his gazoo") Simpson, Chuck Robb, William Perry and Sandra Day O'Connor (Robert Gates has resigned to clean up Rumsfeld's disaster at DOD). Bush needs the panel, so the thinking goes, to give him an "out" from Iraquagmire, a point supposedly driven home hard directly to the President by Baker and Bush 41. The same conventional wisdom says that Democrats need the Wise Men (and one Wise Woman) so that they can avoid having to make the hard decisions on Iraquagmire, now that it's their problem, too. I think both sides' faith is misplaced; I have a hard time imagining that this panel can actually form a consensus, for one thing; for another, Democrats in Congress are demanding a timetable that the White House says is not open for discussion. My best guess is that the panel will recommend opening talks with Iraq and Syria and the White House will comply as slowly as humanly possible, trying to run out the clock on this presidency and dump the disaster on whichever poor dumb bastard is elected in '08. And Democrats can't use the one real tool they have to force Bush to yield, cutting the military budget for Iraq, because that will inevitably be seen as stabbing US soldiers in the back. And, as Michael Hirsch points out, it may well already be too late for anything or anybody to save Iraq from a nasty sectarian collapse. So, unfortunately, panel or no panel, we're likely down to only two options: a bloody, grinding status quo or the political equivalent of nuclear war between a Democratic Congress with a slim majority and a lame duck White House with no credibility and no "political capital."

UPDATE: Oh, yeah, NOW we're saved! Bush has started his own little "Iraq Study Group," possibly as a prelude to ignoring the advice of the Council of Grownups.

Okay, So NOW What?

Democrats have won control of Congress; so what do they propose to do with it? Your Liberal Media is hard at work pushing the "triumph of the moderates" and "conservative vs. liberal Democrats" memes, despite a rather distinct lack of evidence for either. Meanwhile. in the vast untamed wilds of the blogosphere, some argue that the time for tea parties is over, by which I take it they mean impeachment followed immediately by tar and feathering, while others suggest an aggressive agenda, but with fewer molotov cocktails. The Carpetbagger recently chewed over the notion that Congressional Democrats could learn alot from how the GOP ran the show, and I agree, with the caveat that the lessons are both positive and negative. My two cents worth is that, if the Democrats are serious about laying the groundwork for 2008, they should take a page from Harry Truman, only in reverse. Pass legislation that is both badly needed and politically popular (the list is pretty extensive and should definately include election and redistricting reform) and (bearing in mind that Dems do NOT have anything like a veto-proof majority) dare the President to veto it. Given the Bush Administration's attitude towards bipartisanship in the past, I would leave it to the White House to extend an olive branch, but take it if sincerely offered. Investigate by all means, this Administration REEKS, but be mindful of the inevitable and defeaning MSM and GOP spin that this is all "politically motivated," and "revenge" and so forth. Don't let disdain for this President outweigh common political sense. Remember Clinton. And above all, be prepared to push back HARD if the White House decides to pick a fight; remember, they will be laying tracks for 2008, too. It'll all be about the "legacy" for Dubya for here on out.