Thank goodness. The thought of having to go through the 2016 election without Jon Stewart, Keith Olbermann, and "The Real" Stephen Colbert was making me feel depressed.
Click it to big it.
Click it to big it.
(Jordan) was raised in Houston and attended Phillis Wheatley High School in the Fifth Ward. She had a gift for public speaking and was a champion debater in high school. She graduated from Boston University School of Law in 1959, and six years later she won a seat in the Texas Senate, becoming the first black woman to do so.
In 1972, she was elected as pro tempore by her peers, which meant she would serve as governor if both the governor and the lieutenant governor were out of state. On June 10, 1972, she was actually the governor of Texas.
After she was elected to the U.S. House of Representatives, she was known as an effective legislator. She gave the opening televised remarks demanding the impeachment of President Nixon and blew away constituents with her eloquent reasoning and influential speech.
And again, Barbara Jordan made history becoming the first African-American woman to deliver the keynote address at the 1976 Democratic National Convention. Sadly, two years after she was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom in ’94, Jordan passed away after a long battle with leukemia.
It’s mid-summer, after the legislative session and before the proper start of next year’s election cycle, which means the state’s political organizations are in full churn. Politicos of all stripes are leaving politics for policy or vice versa, getting fired and promoted, and maybe leaving the game—or the state—altogether. That’s a normal part of life in politics, where jobs are often short-term and so is loyalty.
The same holds true at the high-profile organizing group Battleground Texas, where political director Cliff Walker will be stepping down next week. It’s the latest of a number of departures by Battleground senior staff since last year’s crushing electoral defeats. Walker, who had been with the organization since the beginning in 2013, was the highest-profile Texan in the group. As the relationship between Battleground and other parts of the Democratic coalition suffered during last year’s election due to mutual distrust, it fell to Walker, respected by other Texas Dems, to try to repair things.
But since November, a lot of Battleground’s founding notables have been looking for other work. A number of Obama campaign veterans have left for greener pastures in other states, including former Campaigns Director Ramsey Reid, former Communications Director Erica Sackin, and former Field Director Victoria Zyp. Former Digital Director Christina Oliver left the organization for a job at an Austin consulting firm owned by Republican U.S. Senator John Cornyn’s former campaign manager. The departure of Walker means that a large part of the original Battleground brain trust is now gone.
Political organizations like Battleground experience a high rate of turnover naturally. And for years, there’s been something of a conveyor belt taking talented Democratic political staffers away from Texas, or out of politics altogether—options that offer more rewarding work, and usually, bigger paychecks. Former Texas Democratic Party chief Will Hailer, who party leaders expected to stay for longer than one election cycle, jumped ship shortly after last year’s election for a Washington, D.C. consulting firm.
So Battleground’s staffing issues aren’t unique—a statement from the group called them “really normal transitions,” and pointed to the continuity of Executive Director Jenn Brown’s leadership—but they could pose a greater threat to the organization than progressive groups with deeper roots in Texas. One of the talking points when the group launched concerned Battleground’s ability to attract top talent from across the nation and fuse it with in-state know-how, helped along by a dedicated source of donor money. But it will most likely be harder for Battleground to recruit top talent now.
Jeff Rotkoff, who represents one of Battleground’s largest backers, Houston mega-donor Steve Mostyn, praised Walker’s work and career and predicted he would “continue to be an important member of [the] community in whatever comes next for him.”
[...]
Brown is currently developing what a statement from the group called a new “strategic plan for the organization.” In it, she’ll need to come up with fixes for a host of unresolved issues regarding Battleground’s place in the Democratic coalition. In particular, some Texas Democrats worried that Battleground would turn into an adjunct of Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign, to the detriment of efforts in local and legislative races. That has echoes of one of the major conflicts of the 2014 cycle—some candidates felt that Battleground’s focus on a divisive top-ticket candidate, Wendy Davis, hurt down-ballot efforts.
I announced today that I’m running for the Senate. If you read these e-mails, then there’s a good chance that you and I think alike. We are kindred spirits. We see things the same way.
So in a way, it’s sort of like you’re running for the Senate. I’m just doing it for you.
Think about it. You and I have a lot of shared beliefs, a lot of shared values. You and I see what needs to be done, and how to do it. If I make it to the Senate, there’s a good chance that I’ll do that job just as you would.
And one thing is for sure: You deserve your support. As the Jewish scholar Hillel asked, “If I will not be for myself, who will be for me?”
As you may have heard, Democratic turnout dropped off a cliff again last year, just like it did in 2010. I was wondering why, so I asked. I polled Florida non-voters. I found that the main reason why they didn't vote last year was simple: They couldn't see any difference between the candidates. When there is no difference between the candidates, Democrats don't vote, and Democrats lose.
By way of background, the top race in Florida last year was the race for Governor. The Republican incumbent was Rick Scott, whose hospital chain perpetrated the largest Medicare fraud in history. (That is not a misprint.) Nevertheless, because he had an (R) next to his name on the 2010 ballot, he won. He has been a horrible governor, easily one of the worst in the country. Everyone knew that the Democrats had a chance to bring him down last year, especially since our Democratic President had carried Florida twice in a row. There are 500,000 more registered Democrats than registered Republicans in Florida.
The Democratic nominee was Charlie Crist, a REPUBLICAN former governor. Crist was so far to the right that he was known as "Chain-Gang Charlie." In 2010, when Scott was first elected, Crist killed the Democrat's chances for a US Senate seat from Florida by dropping out of his own Republican primary, where he was 25 points down, and running as an "independent." That "stinking maneuver" (as Yitzhak Rabin would have put it) made Marco Rubio the junior senator from Florida.
Rather than shunning Crist for blowing that 2010 Senate race for the Democrats, the Democrats actually recruited him. They crowned someone who was a Republican just a few years earlier, and a conservative Republican at that, as the "Democratic" nominee for governor.
Political strategists called this a brilliant move by the Democratic Party. And Democratic voters were appalled, as my own little poll showed. Democratic voters stayed home in droves, and the Democrats lost.
Getting back to our poll, we focused on people who actually could have voted, not permanent residents, convicted felons whose rights had not been restored or children. We offered the non-voters 12 different reasons to explain why they hadn't voted. Reason #1, the most "popular," was that "people did not like either choice for Governor." Forty-one percent of the Democratic non-voters said that this was the main reason why people didn't vote.
By the way, the non-voters were overwhelmingly Democratic, whether or not they were registered as such. When asked whom they had had favored in the 2012 Presidential race, they chose Obama over Romney by 17 points. President Obama won Florida -- among the actual voters -- by less than one point.
So, let's be honest. When we put up a pseudo-Democrat or a neo-Democrat or a quasi-Democrat or a semi-Democrat for Team Blue, our voters are not amused. They are not fooled. And we only hurt ourselves.
The voters deserve a choice. In fact, they insist on it. Or they simply won't vote.
Bernie Sanders says that the "real unemployment rate" is 10.5 percent. In other news, my "real height" is 6'2'', my car's "real gas mileage" is 50 mpg and my "real GPA" is a 4.0. See how easy lying is, no wonder he does it!
The net worth of the average American household dropped by more than one-third in ten years. The decline from the 2007 peak was almost 50 percent, in just six years. (Most of that loss was in the value of one’s home — home is where the heartache is.)
That’s why everyone is so angry.
The net worth decline of someone at the 25th percentile (meaning that three-quarters of all household are richer than you) was even more extreme — from $10,129 to $3200. And among the bottom five percent, whose net worth is negative, their debt tripled.
Only the top 10 percent of all Americans improved their standards of living during that decade. As the study summarized, “wealth inequality increased significantly from 2003 through 2013; by some metrics inequality roughly doubled.”
By the way, this is not an isolated study. Other studies have shown declining hourly wages going all the way back to 1974. That’s more than four decades of worse-and-worse.
Look at what’s been in the headlines lately: Fast Track. Obamacare. Power plant emissions. Marriage equality. Greece. Entirely absent from the airwaves is any discussion of what’s really on people’s minds, i.e., this.
So, to sum it up, people’s lives are circling the drain, and nobody’s even talking about it, much less doing something about it. That’s why everyone is so angry. And I’m hoping against hope that my party, the Democratic Party, wakes up and does something about it. (My emphasis.)
Speaking for myself, I’ll try my best to do something about it. But you knew that already.
City Councilman Stephen Costello raised $1.8 million in the reporting period that ended June 30, his campaign announced Wednesday, putting him atop the field of top-tier contenders.
The candidates' campaign finance reports are not due until next Wednesday, but already this year's announced hauls top $6 million.
Former Harris County Sheriff Adrian Garcia was first out of the gate with his figures, announcing Tuesday that he raised $1.5 million since announcing his candidacy in May. According to his campaign, Garcia neither contributed his own money nor transferred funds from his sheriff's account.
Former mayor of Kemah (Bill) King followed with a statement Wednesday morning saying he raised $1.25 million, $750,000 of which came from donors, meaning King likely supplied $500,000 for his own bid.
Costello also financed his own campaign to the tune of $250,000 and transferred $262,000 from his city council account, according to his release.
State Rep. Sylvester Turner reported raising $750,000 in the nine days between the end of the state legislative fundraising blackout and the close of the reporting period. Turner started the race with $900,000 from his legislative account already in the bank.
Meanwhile, 2013 mayoral runner-up Ben Hall raised nearly $800,000, according to his campaign, $500,000 of which he donated himself.
Former Congressman and City Councilman Chris Bell ended the reporting period with the lowest number of the group, having raised $400,000.
Gov. Greg Abbott’s campaign committee raised $8.25 million the last nine days of June.
That’s very good. Nearly $1 million a day. At that pace, he could run for president.
But, to put it in context, those were the first nine days Abbott could receive contributions since being elected governor, so it reflects a certain pent-up energy.
To avoid the indelicate impression that influence might be being bought or sold, state officeholders in Texas cannot receive contributions during biennial legislative sessions and the veto period that follows. The prohibition extends from Dec. 14 to June 21.
Even so, the fundraising numbers – released by his campaign Wednesday ahead of next week’s filing deadline with the Texas Ethics Commission – only enhance Abbott’s reputation as an epic fundraiser and a politician who knows that the best way to discourage a serious challenge, or defeat an opponent, is with a big pile of cash.
Abbott’s campaign committee has $17.7 million in cash on hand. Two years ago, as he embarked on his campaign for governor, he had $20 million in the bank. Abbott is not up for re-election until 2018.
What was striking about Hillary Clinton’s remarks, which to its credit, the Atlantic reproduced in full, was how often she depicted the US policy of aggression as morally desirable as well as necessary to protect Christians in the US from jihadis.
...Bernie Sanders voters grotesquely morphing into Hillary Clinton voters takes the political bait-and-switch to a whole new galaxy. Not merely will such a switch exhibit an astonishing failure to learn from the egregious prior examples of Bill Clinton, Barack Obama, and even “Dubya” Bush. Such a switch will replace a rare honest politician offering real prospects of overhauling U.S. government from functioning as a predatory machine (whose only face for many innocent, terrorized Arabs, is the predator drone) with a deeply corrupt one who’s the virtual indentured servant of plutocratic predators. So much so that the fittest form of address for President Clinton II—in splendid parody of the “Madam President” moniker now fondly polished by her supporters—would be “Madam Predator.”
Now, one scarcely expects average “low-information voters,” daily victims of mainstream media propaganda, to “grok” the hideous aptness of the “Madam Predator” label. But for early Sanders supporters—far more idealistic, politically aware, and policy-demanding than average voters—the damning truthfulness of the label should be self-evident. For Hillary Clinton is provably in bed with military, surveillance, financial, and fossil fuel predators who menace not just the peace, freedom, and well-being of U.S. and global citizens, but (through ramped-up drilling and fracking) the very survival of our species.
So why do so many Sanders supporters—the ones I’m apt to call Bernie’s sheep—act as if the switch from delightedly voting for Bernie to choking back one’s vomit to vote for Hillary will be anything but a harrowing electoral tragedy? A tragedy we should, very arguably, refuse to take part in.
Indeed, it depends on a free, responsible citizen’s act of political interpretation: that we take Bernie’s scarcely acknowledged call for a political revolution vastly more seriously than his pledge that, should he lose, he’ll support Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton. Viewed in other terms, it means true Sanders supporters must combine support for Bernie’s campaign with Chris Hedges’ emphasis on the “moral imperative of revolt.”
[...]
A political revolution supporting Bernie Sanders—but in terms of Chris Hedges’ “moral imperative of revolt”—must be even more outspoken. Where the corporatist media has criminally abdicated its democratic responsibility of truth-telling, Bernie’s revolution must “be the media.” Therefore it must take relish in bird-dogging Hillary—brandishing such slogans as “Madam Predator” or “Show Us the Anti-Money.”
Revolt Against Plutocracy aspires to be the needed political revolution, leveraging Bernie Sanders’ historic campaign to fulfill Chris Hedges’ “moral imperative of revolt.” We categorically refuse to vote for “Madam Predator” Hillary Clinton, strongly endorsing a pledge to write in Bernie Sanders in November 2016 should he (God forbid) lose the Democratic nomination to her. And in the toxic atmosphere of party and media censorship, we alone (among supporters of electable candidates) intend to sustain the revolutionary tradition of “speaking truth to power”—which Democrats’ tight muzzle on Bernie keeps him from doing.