Good Afternoon Sky Dancers!
There’s a lot going on! We’re gearing up for the Mueller Testimony right in the middle of the usual wear and tear on the country caused by having Temper Tantrum Trumpie occupy the White House for another week. If you get a chance, you might want to gear up for the Wednesday Testimony by watching this one hour documentary on the primary findings of the Mueller Report that aired last night. “Understanding the Mueller Report With Ari Melber Sunday July 21, 2019”
Meanwhile, there’s some other interesting news and suggestions we should look at. I was really glad that I attended Essence Fest 2019 and was enrapt by the speeches and presence of both Elizabeth Warren and Kamala Harris. It’s exciting to see so many women running for the Democratic Party’s nomination for President given we watched Hillary Clinton become the first in 2016. Now there’s a few things we can dream about including this proffered by Harper’s Bazaar and Jennifer Wright.. “Why We Need a Two Woman Presidential Ticket! Two women? On a ticket together? Radical! How many old white men would hyperventilate over this?
It simply can’t be done! Two women?On a ticket together? It’s too radical!
To which I’m going to respectfully say: To hell with that thinking. Put two women on the Democratic Party ticket. Specifically, Senators Kamala Harris and Elizabeth Warren..
Bothered by it? No one has been troubled by the fact that presidential political party tickets have been composed of two men since the beginning of time.
If you want the best people, then some variation on Warren/Harris should at least be considered. According to a Change.org poll in California, the two are leading the pack of candidates in that state’s primary with Harris at 23 percent and Warren at 22 percent.
It’s entirely possible that one of these women will win the race for Democratic presidential candidate, and when she does, it’s already assumed that she will select one of the male candidates as her running mate.
But what if she doesn’t take this conventional route? What if we see an all-female ticket? It could be great.
Both candidates have strong ground games and even stronger policy chops! Today, Team Warren put out an article that has the talking heads talking. It’s about what I’ve been saying for about a year now. The next crash is right there on the horizon. “The Coming Economic Crash — And How to Stop It.”
When I look at the economy today, I see a lot to worry about again. I see a manufacturing sector in recession. I see a precarious economy that is built on debt — both household debt and corporate debt — and that is vulnerable to shocks. And I see a number of serious shocks on the horizon that could cause our economy’s shaky foundation to crumble.
The administration may breach the debt ceiling in September, leading to economic turmoil that top economists say would be “more catastrophic” than the collapse of Lehman Brothers in 2008. Trump’s trade war with China threatens American manufacturing and has already hurt American companies that investors think of as “industry bellwethers,” while feedingan all-time economic slowdown in China that could have dramatic ripple effects on the American economy. And Trump is goading the U.K. toward a no-deal Brexit, which even his own administration acknowledges would have “immediate and significant spillover effects” to our economy.
The financial markets agree that there is a serious risk of downturn in the near future. The U.S. Treasury yield curve — a barometer for market confidence — normally slopes upwards because investors demand higher yields for bonds with longer maturities. But this March, it inverted for the first time since 2007, signaling that investors are so worried that things are going to get worse that they’d rather lock in lower rates for the future today than risk long-term rates going even lower. The curve has inverted before each and every recession in the past half century — with only one false signal.
Other women are running for POTUS this year. One of the reasons that Kristen Gillibrand might not be finding high ground could be the subject of this investigation by Jane Mayer in The New Yorker: “The Case of Al Franken.A close look at the accusations against the former senator.”
At his house, Franken said he understood that, in such an atmosphere, the public might not be eager to hear his grievances. Holding his head in his hands, he said, “I don’t think people who have been sexually assaulted, and those kinds of things, want to hear from people who have been #MeToo’d that they’re victims.” Yet, he added, being on the losing side of the #MeToo movement, which he fervently supports, has led him to spend time thinking about such matters as due process, proportionality of punishment, and the consequences of Internet-fuelled outrage. He told me that his therapist had likened his experience to “what happens when primates are shunned and humiliated by the rest of the other primates.” Their reaction, Franken said, with a mirthless laugh, “is ‘I’m going to die alone in the jungle.’ ”
Now sixty-eight, Franken is short and sturdily built, with bristly gray hair, tortoiseshell glasses, and a wide, froglike mouth from which he tends to talk out of one corner. Despite his current isolation, Franken is recognized nearly everywhere he goes, and he often gets stopped on the street. “I can’t go anywhere without people reminding me of this, usually with some version of ‘You shouldn’t have resigned,’ ” Franken said. He appreciates the support, but such comments torment him about his departure from the Senate. He tends to respond curtly, “Yup.”
When I asked him if he truly regretted his decision to resign, he said, “Oh, yeah. Absolutely.” He wishes that he had appeared before a Senate Ethics Committee hearing, as he had requested, allowing him to marshal facts that countered the narrative aired in the press. It is extremely rare for a senator to resign under pressure. No senator has been expelled since the Civil War, and in modern times only three have resigned under the threat of expulsion: Harrison Williams, in 1982, Bob Packwood, in 1995, and John Ensign, in 2011. Williams resigned after he was convicted of bribery and conspiracy; Packwood faced numerous sexual-assault accusations; Ensign was accused of making illegal payoffs to hide an affair.
What follows is a detailed investigation of the complaints most of which still smell a bit fishy to me. Especially, this woman who appears to be have sent up to the deed by the usual cast of “conservative” henchmen.
Tweeden may well have felt harassed, and even violated, by Franken, but he insisted to me that her version of events is “just not true.” He confirmed that he had rehearsed the skit with her, noting, “You always rehearse.” The script, he recalled, called for a man to “surprise” a woman with a kiss, in a “sort of sudden” way, and though Tweeden had read the script, it’s possible that in the moment he startled her. Tweeden wasn’t an actress—before going into broadcasting, she had been a Frederick’s of Hollywood model—so she may have been unfamiliar with rehearsals. But Franken said, of Tweeden, “I don’t remember her being taken aback.” He adamantly denied having stuck his tongue in her mouth.
Franken’s longtime fund-raiser, A. J. Goodman, a former criminal-defense lawyer, told me that it was “easy to see how it could have grossed Tweeden out” to be kissed by Franken. At the time, Franken was fifty-five, and his clothes tended toward mom jeans and garish windbreakers. “He was like your uncle Morty,” Goodman recalled. “He wasn’t Cary Grant. But tongue down the throat? No. I’ve done hundreds of events with this guy. I’ve been on the road and on his book tours with him.” She said that Franken was “five hundred per cent devoted” to Bryson, his wife, whom he met during his freshman year at Harvard. “He can be a jerk, but he’s all about his family,” Goodman said. (Franken and Bryson have a daughter, a son, and four grandchildren.)
In Hollywood, Franken’s reputation had been far from wild. According to Doug Hill and Jeff Weingrad’s book, “Saturday Night,” when Franken worked on “S.N.L.” he was seen as a stickler and a “self-appointed hallway monitor” figure. James Downey, who spent decades writing for the show, told me, of Franken, “He’s lots of things, some delightful, some annoying. He can be very aggressive interpersonally. He can say mean things, or use other people as props. He can seem more confident that the audience will find him adorable than he ought to. His estimate of his charm can be overconfident. But I’ve known him for forty-seven years and he’s the very last person who would be a sexual harasser.”
It’s a long read but worth revisiting the evidence.
Down here in New Orleans there’s an East Bank and a West Bank of the Mississippi even the the actually directions of the locations are north of the river and south of the river. The West Bank has always been the forgotten of the two banks because it’s original purpose was that of the Slave Trade Markets which New Orleans wanted kept out of their faces even though it was a part of the city’s history as well as the region. Gretna is one of the places that sprung up when immigrants from countries like Italy showed up and it still has an ethnic feel to it including a Spanish revival Catholic Orphanage called Hope Haven built in 1925, The place has been in the headlines recently in a less than favorable light: “New lawsuit filed against Catholic Church in N.O. details alleged sexual abuse at orphanage.”
A little more recently Gretna achieved infamy with this awful headline directly after Katrina hit the area via NPR: “Evacuees Were Turned Away at Gretna, La.”
Three days after Hurricane Katrina struck, authorities blocked the road that connects the city of Gretna to New Orleans. Thousands of evacuees say they were prevented from escaping the flooding and chaos, and that shots were fired over their heads.
Believe me, there’s not much wealth over there to protect in Gretna during a good time so there were much sinister forces stopping people from the East going to the West bank where they likely could’ve been reached by buses. Color all of us unsurprised when the local news came up with a headline that has now gone quite viral and national via WAPO: “Officer suggests Ocasio-Cortez should be shot, after he read fake news on Facebook”. Yes, said officer is from Gretna, LA land of shooting at survivors of the worst disaster in the country to stop them from coming near the burbs.
It was not clear from his Facebook post whether police officer Charlie Rispoli knew he was responding to fake news when he suggested Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) should be shot.
“This vile idiot needs a round……..and I don’t mean the kind she used to serve,” Rispoli, a 14-year veteran of the Gretna Police Department in Louisiana, said Thursday, referring to a gunshot and the lawmaker’s earlier career as a bartender, the Times-Picayune/the New Orleans Advocate reported.
The post, which appears to have been deleted along with Rispoli’s Facebook account, comes amid a reckoning with racist and violent social media posts by police and federal law enforcement officers. As posts have been made public, firings and investigations have followed across multiple departments.
We’re all assuming what happens in Gretna gets covered up and buried in Gretna. Just like everything else, nothing will happen.
Texan Wendy Davis is running for US Congress. Let’s hope she can win it. I still have my pink Wendy Shoes. This is via the Texas Tribune: “Wendy Davis announces bid for Congress, will challenge U.S. Rep. Chip Roy. The former state senator is running for office for the first time since her unsuccessful campaign for Texas governor.”
Former Texas state Sen. Wendy Davis is running for Congress.
Early Monday morning, Davis announced her candidacy for the Democratic nomination in Central Texas’ 21st District. She is challenging U.S. Rep. Chip Roy, a freshman Republican from Austin.
She made her intentions known in a biographical video, narrated in part with archival footage from her late father, Jerry Russell.
“I’m running for Congress because people’s voices are still being silenced,” she said. “I’m running for our children and grandchildren, so they can live and love and fight for change themselves.”
So the voices of women with much needed diversity will hopefully block out the trauma of yet another Trumpf Hate Fest in Cincinnati this week undoubtedly timed to draw attention away from the Mueller Testimony. That Hatefest is scheduled for August 1st. The second set of Democratic debates are set for July 30 and 31.
Robert Mueller’s Capitol Hill testimony
- Date: Wednesday, July 24, 2019
- Times: 8:30 a.m. – House Judiciary Committee hearing, 12:00 p.m. – House Intelligence Committee hearing
- Location: Washington, D.C.
How to watch Mueller’s testimony
- Free online stream: Watch CBSN for live coverage of Mueller’s testimony on Capitol Hill. CBS News’ Norah O’Donnell hosts a CBS News network special report starting at 8:30 a.m.
Schedule of Mueller’s testimony
- It will be split across two committee appearances with three hours allotted for the Judiciary Committee and two hours for the Intelligence Committee.
- There will be a 30-minute break in between the two hearings, and the former special counsel will have the opportunity to ask for breaks during each appearance.
- Neither committee is expecting Mueller to give lengthy or extensive answers to lawmakers’ questions. Democratic staff members of the committees say they anticipate “yes” or “no” answers from the former special counsel or very short sentences. But in the end, they believe that the two hearings will help Americans better understand the Mueller report.
Well, that should keep us busy for a few days!
What’s on your reading and blogging list today?
Senator Kirsten Gillibrand says it very well. Surprise!! She’s a woman! She knows whereof she speaks. From Care 2:
Sens. Gillibrand and Boxer, along with seven Democratic senators and the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee are appealing to backers on all of their websites to sign on to the “One Million Strong For Women” in hopes of harnessing this energy and using it to make a strong defense for women’s rights.
Sen. Gillibrand made the pitch to supporters in an email. “Our opponents tried to defund Planned Parenthood, in the federal budget and in many states. They tried to destroy our Medicare and Medicaid lifelines, which would be particularly devastating to women,” the email says. “They tried to get the Susan G. Komen Foundation to cut off support for Planned Parenthood.”
Two male Senators, Frank Lautenberg of New Jersey and Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut joined with Gillibrand, Boxer, and Patty Murray to stand up for women’s autonomy and control over their own bodies.
Weighing in the side of those who know nothing about being a woman and fighting for the freedom to decide when and how to have children, Vice President Joe Biden:
In his first public comments on the decision, Biden told Cincinnati radio station WLW that he is “determined to see that this gets worked out, and I believe we can work it out.”
Biden, the nation’s first Catholic vice president, was among the top aides who had warned President Barack Obama that the decision could be politically explosive, particularly with Catholics, Bloomberg reported Wednesday.
“As a practicing Catholic, I am of the view that this can be worked out and should be worked out. And I know the president feels the same way,” Biden said.
Work what out Joe? A way to let Catholic Bishops control American women’s choices about their own bodies? STFU, Joe. You have no idea what you’re talking about.
“If the president does not reverse the [Health and Human Services] Department’s attack on religious freedom, then the Congress, acting on behalf of the American people and the Constitution we are sworn to uphold and defend, must,” Boehner said in a rare floor speech.
“In imposing this requirement, the federal government is violating a First Amendment right that has stood for more than two centuries. And it is doing so in a manner that affects millions of Americans and harms some of our nation’s most vital institutions.”
Oh really? Well, you are full of sh&t, John. You have no idea what you’re talking about. This is not about the First Amendment. It’s about women’s access to health care. STFU, John.
The same goes for Chris Matthews, Mark Shields, E.J. Dionne, Mike Barnicle, Joe Scarborough, and all the rest of the male punditry who seem to believe they have the right to control women’s choices and their access to basic health care. STFU!! Go find something useful to do and butt out of American women’s lives!
Most of all, the Catholic Bishops and the other fundamentalist religious fanatics who insist on pontificating on issues that affect women’s bodies need to STFU! Hey, I have an idea! How about doing something about the abuse of children by the clergy?
It’s time for women and the men who support them to do the talking. It’s time for men who think they own women and rule their health care choices to listen for a change.
It is truly a Summer Day here in North Georgia…aka Banjoland. The sky is getting that afternoon thunderstorm look to it, and the dogs don’t want to stay outside in the heat…we have to kick them out the door. I guess it is hot everywhere, even under the porch.
Oh, if only to be a resident of New York, particularly a resident in this Senator’s district…I bet you know who I am talking about. Damn, I wish this woman was my Senator: Keep Doing What You’re Doing, Senator Gillibrand
Remember how the number of women in Congress actually declined in 2010, despite the feminist trailblazing of Sarah Palin, Christine O’Donnell, and Sharon Angle? New York Senator Kirsten Gillibrand does.
The Times reports that Gillibrand has launched a campaign called Off the Sidelines, “to mobilize women across the country, in advance of the national elections next year and as evidence emerges that the slow but steady progress made by women in elective politics has begun to stall.” Its actual work sounds not unlike that of EMILY’s List, with which Gillibrand recently held a Facebook chat; The Times says the Senator has “activated her network of donors to help female candidates, emerged as a headliner among audiences of women, tried to recruit female candidates, advised women thinking about running, and started a Web site, offthesidelines.org.”
The story doesn’t mention it, but the difference between Gillibrand’s efforts and say, Sarah Palin’s Mama Grizzlies is that she’s become one of the most visible progressives in the Senate on issues that affect women and LGBT people. Her legislative work and stances reflect the difference between just having women in office and having women in office that work to advance women and vulnerable populations.
She pushed back on the proposed defunding of Planned Parenthood, was instrumental in getting Don’t Ask Don’t Tell repealed and spoke out against the anti-choice Stupak amendment during the health insurance reform debate. She’s been campaigning for the repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act and to allow military women the same access to abortions as civilian women on government insurance. (Of course, as a congresswoman representing a conservative district, she wasn’t so nearly so gay-friendly, but however opportunistic a cause it is for her, she’s getting shit done.)
I would have put the word “feminist” in quotes when describing Palin and the others…cause they are not feminist in my opinion, not no how…not no way!
The article from Jezebel goes on to say:
“You can die a slow death by just not doing something and I feel that’s what’s happened to the women’s movement in the last decade. We’re not doing enough. Now there are great advocacy groups that are working hard night and day to try to protect women’s reproductive freedoms, to protect women’s reproductive health. The Republican Party is focused entirely on undermining women’s rights and reproductive health…. In my view there is a war on women that is not being sufficiently fought against and I’m going to do the best I can with the women and men who are in the Senate who feel as passionately as I do.
All I can say is, hell yeah! Keep doing what you are doing Senator Gillibrand.
Other links you may find interesting here:
Did you hear the latest on the News of the World, Murdoch has shut the paper down…check out these next two links…Where the Murdoch empire and British politics intersect | Comment is free | The Guardian
Looking, presumably, for a photograph that showed Rupert Murdoch with his two former News of the World editors, Rebekah Brooks and Andy Coulson, in the same picture, the Daily Telegraph yesterday came up with one of the three of them in church. Murdoch is seated in the front row on the aisle, and his two henchmen in the row behind him. It was taken in June 2005 and, though the caption didn’t say so, the occasion was a service in St Bride’s, Fleet Street, to mark the end of the street’s 300-year association with the British press following a decision by Reuters, the last great news organisation still based there, to depart for Canary Wharf.
I remember the occasion well, because I was present in church, and I heard Murdoch give a reading from Ecclesiasticus (“Let us now praise famous men” etc). He was only one of the speakers, and the theme of the service, pervading everything everyone said, was praise for the high standards of reporting, and devotion to truth and objectivity, for which Reuters was noted. Murdoch’s group looked serious and devout.
Oh the irony…please click on the link to see the picture of this man…it does speak volumes. For some Q & A on the scandal, here is a link to a discussion held by Guardian’s Editor Alan Rusbriger. Guardian was the newspaper that broke the story: Phone hacking: Q&A with Alan Rusbridger | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk
I mentioned Wednesday about the replacement telescope for Hubble that NASA is working on, it is called JWST, James Webb Space Telescope, well here is the latest news on that…
That link goes to an AFP article, so no quotes, but here is more on the funding cuts: BBC News – JWST backed by Nasa amid call to scrap telescope mission
The James Webb Space Telescope remains central to Nasa’s mission, deputy administrator Lori Garver says.
The agency chief was responding to moves in the House of Representatives to cull the troubled observatory, which is now $2bn over budget.
A House appropriations panel has put forward a bill that would clip Nasa’s 2012 budget and end JWST funding.
But Garver told BBC News: “James Webb is obviously part of our future that we believe very strongly in.”
She said the White House administration and the Nasa management would be working with the House and the Senate to produce a budget that would enable the agency to fulfil its science and exploration objectives. “The process is not over,” she added.
Ms Garver was speaking here at the Kennedy Space Center in Florida where Nasa is preparing to launch its last ever shuttle mission.
The JWST is supposed to be the next great undertaking in space astronomy.
The telescope would have the biggest mirror ever sent into orbit and incorporate detectors capable of seeing the very first galaxies to form in the Universe.
This BBC article has a picture of the telescope, or you can just click here for NASA’s web page:
The James Webb Space Telescope (sometimes called JWST) is a large, infrared-optimized space telescope. The project is working to a 2018 launch date. Webb will find the first galaxies that formed in the early Universe, connecting the Big Bang to our own Milky Way Galaxy. Webb will peer through dusty clouds to see stars forming planetary systems, connecting the Milky Way to our own Solar System. Webb’s instruments will be designed to work primarily in the infrared range of the electromagnetic spectrum, with some capability in the visible range.
Webb will have a large mirror, 6.5 meters (21.3 feet) in diameter and a sunshield the size of a tennis court. Both the mirror and sunshade won’t fit onto the rocket fully open, so both will fold up and open once Webb is in outer space. Webb will reside in an orbit about 1.5 million km (1 million miles) from the Earth.
It will be such a shame if this project looses funding. However, with all the defunding of necessary agencies like Planned Parenthood and possible cuts to Medicaid…I will be very surprised if NASA is able to continue with the JWST Project.
Speaking of Medicaid, there is a new study out of Oregon that proves what we know already to be true…and damn those PLUBs and Jackass Politicians…they can shove their Medicaid cuts up their hypocritical bung holes.(Uh btw… Obama is lumped in with that Jackass group.)
When poor people are given medical insurance, they not only find regular doctors and see doctors more often but they also feel better, are less depressed and are better able to maintain financial stability, according to a new, large-scale study that provides the first rigorously controlled assessment of the impact of Medicaid.While the findings may seem obvious, health economists and policy makers have long questioned whether it would make any difference to provide health insurance to poor people.
It has become part of the debate on Medicaid, at a time when states are cutting back on this insurance program for the poor. In fact, the only reason the study could be done was that Oregon was running out of money and had to choose some people to get insurance and exclude others, providing groups for comparison.
Some said that of course it would help to insure the uninsured. Others said maybe not. There was already a safety net: emergency rooms, charity care, free clinics and the option to go to a doctor and simply not pay the bill. And in any case, the argument goes, if Medicaid coverage is expanded, people will still have trouble seeing a doctor because so few accept that insurance.
The recent threats from Obama’s administration to make cuts in Health Care cost, as discussed here and here, the release of this new report seems to be perfect timing. I doubt it will actually make any difference. The NYT article goes on to say:
The new study, published Thursday by the National Bureau of Economic Research, avoided that problem. Its design is like that used to test new drugs. People were randomly selected to have Medicaid or not, and researchers then asked if the insurance made any difference.
Health economists and other researchers said the study was historic and would be cited for years to come, shaping health care debates.
“It’s obviously a really important paper,” said James Smith, an economist at the RAND Corporation. “It is going to be a classic.”
Richard M. Suzman, director of the behavioral and social research program at the National Institute on Aging, a major source of financing for the research, said it was “one of the most important studies that our division has funded since I’ve been at the N.I.A.,” a period of more than a quarter-century.
Take a look at the links above to get all the actual statistics.
This next link is just plain cool as hell: Lab-made organ implanted for first time – CNN.com
For the first time, a patient has received a synthetic windpipe that was created in a lab with the patient’s own stem cells and without using human donor tissue, researchers said Thursday.
Previous lab-generated transplants either used a segment of donor windpipe or involved tissue only, not an organ.
In a laboratory in London, scientists created a trachea, which is a tube-like airway that connects at the voice box and branches into both lungs.
The form was made of polymers that had a spongy and flexible texture. Stiff rings around the tube mimicked the structure of a human trachea.
The form was then bathed in a solution containing the patient’s stem cells “to get the cells to grow on the sponge material,” said David Green, president of Harvard Bioscience. Stem cells can divide and turn into a range of cell types, including those in organs.This is the artificial trachea, covered in the patient’s cells.
His company worked on the stem cell solution, which is seen as a pink liquid in the photo at left. The purpose was to “seed” the synthetic windpipe — as you would seed a new lawn — to grow on the structure.
“Stem cells from the own patient were growing inside and outside,” Macchiarini said. “This structure was becoming a living structure.”
The stem cells were given physical or chemical cues to create the desired type, Green said.
Once the cells were thriving on the form, the artificial trachea was implanted into the patient.
His body accepted the new trachea, and he even had a cough reflex two days after the surgery, Macchiarini said.
Wonderful news isn’t it?
Well, what are you all doing this evening? We have some beautiful fresh corn that I am going to put out on the grill…if the weather cooperates. Mmmmm….yummy!
With over 60% reporting and Hochul holding onto her lead, lots of people calling it for Hochul:
Another great tweet:
@thepeoplesview: First Republican electoral casualty of Paul Ryan’s Kill-Medicare plan: Kathy Hochul wins in NY-26! Hee!
As I noted in my post earlier tonight, in a move signaling how weak the GOP is, their candidate Jane Corwin obtained a court order blocking a certification of the winner tonight… it looks like we’ll have to wait until Thursday or so, but let the celebrating begin… here’s hoping this is a huge blow to DC and the Austerity crowd.
It was after all Kirsten Gillibrand, and not DC Dems, who saw the opening in NY-26 and campaigned hard for Kathy Hochul…via the Hill:
Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) has emerged as one of the most prominent supporters of New York House candidate Kathy Hochul.
Washington Democrats have been keeping their distance from Hochul, the party’s nominee in the May 24 special election for former Rep. Chris Lee’s (R-N.Y.) seat. Meanwhile, Republicans leaders including Rep. Pete Sessions (Texas) and Speaker John Boehner (Ohio) have lent their backing to the GOP nominee, Jane Corwin.
Gillibrand, a former upstate congresswoman, sent a fundraising pitch on Hochul’s behalf and teamed with the pro-choice group EMILY’s List to urge activists to lend their support.
“Kathy is an extraordinary candidate,” Gillibrand said Tuesday during a Web forum hosted by EMILY’s List. “I know she can win this race.”
This just reminds me of all the attacks on Coakley and Emily’s List during the Scott Brown race… as I said then, “In Defense of the Emily’s List Candidate”:
Emily’s List produced a winning primary candidate (they backed the candidate who won the popular vote in the 2008 primaries too for that matter). It’s the Obama Era of the Democratic party that has created bad electoral conditions for Democratic nominees and made it difficult for liberals to stand on principle. (Even the socialist in the U.S. Senate voted for Obama’s health insurance scam. Way to discredit the right-wing canard that Obama’s terrible policies are synonymous with socialism.)
The one surefire way to avoid becoming the target of local backlash against Obama is to run against Obama’s policies–and in today’s environment where the activist left is split up along deep fault lines (“submit to party unity or else you’re a certain class of politician, voter, or woman”), Democratic nominees do not have the benefit of a ready-made independent fundraising network to take on the Obama machine during a general election yet. Of course they could try to build one, but either way it is an uphill battle and there is no easy path to victory whatever they choose.
This race was somewhat different in that Hochul could run against the GOP’s toxic Ryancare rather than against Obamacare, but when you hear all the spin tonight and the Dem machine taking credit for Hochul’s win, remember that it was Kirsten Gillibrand and Emily’s List who shored up Kathy Hochul, not Washington Dems, who were too afraid to get behind Hochul.
The “Emily’s List” candidate won in the very red district of NY-26!
Congrats to Kathy, and Kirsten for president!
Hochul’s win tonight also makes Eric Cantor’s and Jonah Goldberg’s push for Paul Ryan to run for president (not to mention Charles Krathammer’s “Draft Paul Ryan” noises from a month ago) all the more ridiculous and embarrassing for the GOP.