Common Sense

Interviewing Evan Bayh

The Fix looks at possible '08 contender Evan Bayh.

Never a charismatic politician, Bayh is hoping that voters see that serious times call for serious politicians -- a philosophy of bridge-building over bomb-throwing. "Leading this country has to be about something other than ideological division," Bayh said. "It's got to be about how we move this country forward in practical terms, not looking at issues as left or right or even center but instead do they make sense, will they matter in peoples' lives?"

That's not to say, Bayh argues, that he is simply "Republican lite" as his critics on the party's ideological left have dubbed him. "I've got a long record of standing for progressive things that help to empower people to meet the challenges they confront," said Bayh -- rattling off a list of examples from improving schools to expanding health care to balancing the budget.

I just can't get excited about Bayh... nor can anyone else, I think. If there is a groundwell of support for a red-state governor turned presidential candidate, that position is already filled by Mark Warner. He's certainly got most of the blogosphere (and in turn, many Democratic activists) excited about his forthcoming run.

And Warner has something that Bayh doesn't have within the rank and file Democrats, he's got the perception of a fighter who stands for what he belives in, even if they don't comport with the liberal base. Bayh, to anyone that actually knows who he is, is something of an equivocator. He may have some of the same qualities of Warner, but he is damaged goods to the base.

If anyone is going to get liberals like me to abandon our hope of a Russ Feingold presidency, it is going to be the good governor of Virginia, not Evan Bayh.

If you propose it, they will come

For all the naysayers in the Democratic leadership, Regular Joe Dems seem to be embracing Sen. Russ Feingold after his call to censure President Bush for his authorization to illegally wiretap domestic phone calls without a warrant.

Everyone has called it a "dumb" political move and one that "energizes the Republican base." And?

Did these people really think that the GOP base wasn't going to be energized at some point? That the Republicans were going to see the polls predicting their demise and not do something to stop it? Pfui. It was inevitable.

What wasn't inevitable was that a Democrat would raise his voice in opposition to the administration. The leadership of the Dems seems to have a "do nothing" approach to this midterm election season. As in, do nothing and watch the Republicans implode, making us the winner by default.

I don't think we need to win by default. I think we do just fine when we articulate what we want for this country and show the people our ideas. Standing back and saying nothing is the exact opposite of that.

This shows the huge disconnect between the people that are supposed to be the leaders in our party and the average citizen who votes Democratic. I would posit the question "How can they lead the country if they can't even lead us?" for you to consider.

The really funny thing about all of this is that he is being accused of doing this for political gain. I don't know how he gains politically if it is such a dumb move and Russ Feingold is the most honest man in Washington. He doesn't take PAC money, he always votes how he says he is going to vote and I don't think anyone has been more upfront about what they are thinking with the people who voted him into office. Yet, all of a sudden Russ Feingold is the Democratic Machiavelli? Methinks it is more a projection of one's own devaint political wants then any scheming on the part of "The Big Cheese" (my new name for Russ).

Feingold is the kind of guy that does what he says he is going to do, regardless of consequences, treating every day in office as though it may be he his last. That takes a lot of guts. And when some of us see a guy with guts, we follow him. We don't care if he's "electable" and we don't care who is the "front-runner" or who has all the money. We go with the guts.

Thank you Donna Brazile

From The Situation Room Thursday:

BRAZILE: I disagree with the Democrats. For them to think that when the wheels come off the Republican Party, somehow or another we're going to win office is wrong. Democrats must show leadership, Democrats must tell the American people what they would do differently. And Democrats must show the American people in a very clear way in November that they can run the government much differently than Republicans. Otherwise, we're going to have more of the same in 2006.

If we want to be realy leaders, we can't just be the not-Republicans. We can't be the default vote when people get so tired of the GOP train wreck. We've got to offer something worth voting for.

Q and A with Kos

Pink Lady pointed me to this week's NY Times Magazine Q&A with Markos Moulitsas.

A Q&A is pretty self-explanatory, but this particular bit is something I want to talk about.

Whom would you like to see run in 2008?

I like Mark Warner. I like Russ Feingold. I don't hate Hillary, but I don't like anyone who is declared by fiat to be the front-runner.

Something that has ticked me off to no end over the past week has been the abandonment by the Democratic leadership of Sen. Russ Feingold on the censure proposal. Anytime a Democrat offers to back up what he's been saying, the leadership immediately abandons them, leaving them on their own to face criticism and ridicule.

The same thing happened with Rep. John Murtha. Democrats spent the better part of 2005 endlessly criticizing the Iraq War. When someone stepped up to the plate and offered a serious solution based on years of experience, the knee-jerk reaction was to leave him to the wolves. It took quite a lot of criticism before Nancy Pelosi even bothered to agree with him. Of course, he's still out there on his own calling for withdrawl.

The same thing happens to Feingold on a daily basis now, it seems. We've been harping, as a party, about the Patriot Act since the 2004 elections. When Sen. Feingold suggested that we may filibuster the renewal vote, the leadership balked, allowing smooth passage of something that we all agreed was a bad law.

Every Democrat and their yellow dog has jumped on the "Illegal Wiretapping is Wrong" bandwagon. But when a Democrat suggests that we may want to censure the sitting president for doing something illegal (since Congress isn't going to bother to investigate it, and all) he's left twisting in the wind. Bill Kristol, uber-conservative pundit, has come to his defense before the party leadership. Conservative, Republican Sen. Chuck Hagel has started agreeing with Murtha before Hillary Clinton.

You want to know why people think Democrats are weak? And they do. It's not because we don't rejoice at every chance to go to war; it's because we don't back up anything we say. We'll whine all day, but when push comes to shove, our party leadership and most of our Congressional delegation bend over and let the Republicans do the shoving, if you know what I mean.

It has also made me realize that Feingold will never have enough party support to win the nomination in 2008. More and more, I just don't see him gaining enough momentum. Sitting with Markos and Jerome last week, I was amazed at their enthusiasm for Gov. Mark Warner. A lot of other bloggers, too, have begun talking up his positives, his "electability" and his early status as the anti-Hillary. As much as I want to vote for Sen. Russ Feingold, it is hard to ignore that din for Warner.

So I will be taking another look at him (while I curse myself for missing the oppurtunity to meet him in Austin last month) as I make an agonizing reappraisal of the whole situation just two years out from the primaries.

Glen Maxey making the case

Glen Maxey has made it official (some time ago, actually) that he is indeed running for state party chair in the June convention. It's no secret that I'm pretty happy about that. I am a fan.

BOR reprints Maxey laying out the case for his chairmanship at the state convention and not the earlier SDEC convention:

We are less than 90 days from the State Democratic Convention in Fort Worth.

I hope you are part of this process and will be attending your Senate or County Convention on March 25th, and will be a delegate this June at the convention.

At the convention, delegates will have a choice from among several candidates for the position of state party chair. 

I have announced as a candidate for that office ( www.MaxeyforChair.com ) and laid out a vision for our party over the coming years. We must open up the process, reinvigorate those who have become disillusioned, and welcome the new energy of folks across Texas who wish for a party that stands for something again.

And for many, their frustration is best expressed by a volunteer who wrote me this week: “I think someone should start a Democratic Party in Texas!!!!!!”

So with the beginnings of a real conversation and discussion about our party’s direction underway, I’m saddened to write this.

Some folks distrust the thousands of Democrats who’ll be coming to Fort Worth so much that they once again have decided to try to take away your right to a real discussion.

The back room deal is alive and well in our party.  The phone lines have been burning up over the last few days, as our current Chair, Mr. Charles Soechting, and “the brokers of the status quo” have been hatching their deal to shut out the delegates once again.

On Tuesday, Chairman Soechting announced his resignation for personal reasons relating to family and business. Sadly, that’s not the reason he expressed in the calls over the last weeks.

As I’ve heard the story repeated by many, he is doing this because the insiders have decided that Glen Maxey might be elected at the State Convention.  I’m flattered that they believe the delegates would elect me.  However, I’m appalled that they think this fast move to give their candidate the “incumbency” advantage won’t be noticed for what it is: a slap in the delegates’ face, yet again.

Dropping out and calling a quick election wasn’t right when Republicans Todd Baxter and Ray Allen resigned from the Legislature and allowed Rick Perry to try to set up a short-lived “incumbency” for their successors.  It smelled when Perry did it, and it smells when our Democratic leadership does it.

In any case, their plan was not for Glen Maxey to be the person elected by the 63 members of State Democratic Executive Committee at this hastily called meeting.

So, just for the record, I wanted you all to know that I won’t seek the temporary chairmanship for the 49 days until a permanent chair will be elected by the people of the Texas Democratic Party.

I’ll continue to take my case to the duly elected delegates who are entrusted by state law and by the rules of this party to make this decision.

I urge you to talk to your SDEC members about this backroom deal. Ask them to support allowing the delegates to make this decision as the law and the rules suggest.

Instead of calling a special election 49 days before the Convention, Mr. Soechting could just as easily turn over the Chair to our first Vice Chair, Ms. Hadnot..  While he has the power to call the meeting to do the insider deal, he also has the ability to trust the judgment of Texas Democrats and allow the delegates to lead on this important decision. 

I wish Mr. Soechting well in his future endeavors.

But under a Glen Maxey chairmanship, there will be no more backroom deals.

Glen Maxey

Candidate for State Party Chair at the June Convention

P.S.  The SDEC will meet this Saturday, March 18th in San Marcos.  If you wish to contact your members before the meeting, their contact information is listed at:

http://www.txdemocrats.org/about/leadership/sdec/

P.S.S.  I  will not be able to attend Saturday’s SDEC meeting.  My closest friend and a longtime Democratic leader, Erma Faye Jefferson passed away this week.  Services are at 11:00 am at Aldersgate Church, 2201 Earl Rudder, College Station. March 18th, 2006.

For God's sake, read this!

If you want to know what the hell is going on in the Democratic party right now, you will read this profile of Mark Warner in the NY Times Magazine.

It is ostensibly about Warner, but it also delves into how the primary field is shaping up and the chances each candidate has against the awesomeness</snark> that is Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Paul Hackett is pissed

And he is also out of the race for the Ohio Senate seat. Says Hackett:

"My donor base and host base on both coasts was contacted by elected officials and asked to stop giving," Hackett said. "The original promise to me from Schumer was that I would have no financial concerns. It went from that to Senator Schumer actually working against my ability to raise money."

Schumer, who represents New York, was not immediately available for comment.

I'd be pissed, too, if somebody pulled that shit on me. This was all a bunch of political maneeuvering on the part of some Democratic leaders to get Hackett to run for the Congressional seat he nearly won just a few months ago.

The problem is that he told other people he wouldn't run against Jean Schmidt again, and he's sticking by it, which is definitely the honorable thing to do.

Now, kept from running a decent Senate campaign and not able to run in his Congressional district, his political career is over. A strong voice for the Democrats that was able to charge up his base, raise unheard of sums of money on the Internet and gain 48% of the vote in a district that normally would have afforded him 35% is now out of politics because the Democratic leadership can't leave well enough alone. They have to be masters of political jujustsu.

Dick Cheney shoots a guy in the face; we shoot ourselves in the foot. Tell me, which is worse?

The late bird gets no worm

You see, I sleep all day, so I don't know what the hell is going on, but apparently there are people who don't like Glen Maxey.

If you look to the right, you'll see an ad from DraftMaxey.com running for one more day, I believe. Well, there is a lot of buzz to get Glen Maxey to run for state party chair and I accepted the ad based on my all-consuming greed and the fact that I like Glen and his work. I went so far as to vote for him during our Texan of the Year: Blogger Style contest.

The thing is, he hasn't announced he is running yet. He isn't the one behind DraftMaxey.com, but he hasn't decided, hence a draft movement. Some people want him to just make a decision and it turned into an ugly flame war right under my nose. The guys at South Texas Chisme wrote some things and one of their readers started sending hate mail to Matt @ JustAnotherBlog and KT @ BOR wrote about this since he is actually part of the DraftMaxey movement.

It begs the question 'Can't we all just get along?'

I was blissfully unawares this whole time because, well, last night was high school basketball night. But, I do want to make clear where I stand and that is I don't like intra-party bickering, but it seems that is inevitable. We had the same problem a year ago when the DNC was picking a new chairman. It's important for us to remember that we all play for the same team when we're trying to decide which direction we should be going in.

For whatever it's worth, I'm throwing my support behind Glen. I think he can do the job better than anyone else I know. As politically isolated as I am, I don't know many people. I do know that Glen did an excellent job with No Nonsense in November. We lost that fight, but right up until the end I had hope that we could win, though we were doomed to failure. That counts in my book.

When a stranger calls

I just thought I would relay a funny incident that just happened while writing that last post. Someone from the DCCC called my personal extension at work, asked for me by name and went on the spiel about money to break the GOP majority in Congress.

The funny thing about it is that I've never given to the DCCC, even during 2004. I only give to candidates or charities. I did pledge $20 bucks, just because I felt bad, but I thought it was strange that somebody from the DCCC was calling me at work and knew my address and everything. Am I on a donor list of some kind? News to me.

New calendars, new hope

We're still arguing about the next primary calendar? For God's sakes, lets just agree that front-loading got us a consensus nominee too early and that we shouldn't do that again.

I think the problem lies not in that we picked a bad candidate, but we picked him too soon and he spent the spring windsurfing instead of campaigning to conserve his warchest. I don't see how having several caucuses before New Hampshire solve that problem. I don't see how pissing off any of the states solves anything.

And everytime we complain about New Hampshire and Iowa being too white, it just causes more problems. We're talking about Democrats that are white, not old, white Republicans. I would think that they are open to progressive and dare I say liberal ideas. Just because they are white doesn't mean they are any less Democrat and any less committed to nominated the best Democrat to do the job.

Trying to set up a quota system so that the blacks get their state, then the Hispanics, then the whites only does one thing: it divides us. At a time when we should be trying to come together to elect a progressive person, we can get past the color of each others' skin. That's shameful.