Online Left

A Dying Breed: Quote of the Day

It is true that being a Republican moderate sometimes feels like being a cast member of Survivor -- you are presented with multiple challenges, and you often get the distinct feeling that you're no longer welcome in the tribe. But it is truly a dangerous signal that a Republican senator of nearly three decades no longer felt able to remain in the party.

Senator Olympia Snowe, R-Maine

Insane In the Membrane

"I find it interesting that it was back in the 1970s that the swine flu broke out then under another Democrat president Jimmy Carter. And I'm not blaming this on President Obama, I just think it's an interesting coincidence" -- Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN 06), on "Pajama's TV".

Of course, the last outbreak was in 1976, when the not-so-much-a-Democrat Gerald Ford was in office. Ahem. (The Dallas Morning News)

Statement by Senator Arlen Specter

April 28, 2009

I have been a Republican since 1966. I have been working extremely hard for the Party, for its candidates and for the ideals of a Republican Party whose tent is big enough to welcome diverse points of view. While I have been comfortable being a Republican, my Party has not defined who I am. I have taken each issue one at a time and have exercised independent judgment to do what I thought was best for Pennsylvania and the nation.

Since my election in 1980, as part of the Reagan Big Tent, the Republican Party has moved far to the right. Last year, more than 200,000 Republicans in Pennsylvania changed their registration to become Democrats. I now find my political philosophy more in line with Democrats than Republicans.

When I supported the stimulus package, I knew that it would not be popular with the Republican Party. But, I saw the stimulus as necessary to lessen the risk of a far more serious recession than we are now experiencing.

Since then, I have traveled the State, talked to Republican leaders and office‐holders and my supporters and I have carefully examined public opinion. It has become clear to me that the stimulus vote caused a schism which makes our differences irreconcilable. On this state of the record, I am unwilling to have my twenty‐nine year Senate record judged by the Pennsylvania Republican primary electorate. I have not represented the Republican Party. I have represented the people of Pennsylvania.

I have decided to run for re‐election in 2010 in the Democratic primary. I am ready, willing and anxious to take on all comers and have my candidacy for reelection determined in a general election.

I deeply regret that I will be disappointing many friends and supporters. I can understand their disappointment. I am also disappointed that so many in the Party I have worked for for more than four decades do not want me to be their candidate. It is very painful on both sides. I thank especially Senators McConnell and Cornyn for their forbearance.

I am not making this decision because there are no important and interesting opportunities outside the Senate. I take on this complicated run for re‐election because I am deeply concerned about the future of our country and I believe I have a significant contribution to make on many of the key issues of the day, especially medical research. NIH funding has saved or lengthened thousands of lives, including mine, and much more needs to be done. And my seniority is very important to continue to bring important projects vital to Pennsylvania’s economy. I am taking this action now because there are fewer than thirteen months to the 2010 Pennsylvania Primary and there is much to be done in preparation for that election. Upon request, I will return campaign contributions contributed during this cycle.

While each member of the Senate caucuses with his Party, what each of us hopes to accomplish is distinct from his party affiliation. The American people do not care which Party solves the problems confronting our nation. And no Senator, no matter how loyal he is to his Party, should or would put party loyalty above his duty to the state and nation.

My change in party affiliation does not mean that I will be a party‐line voter any more for the Democrats that I have been for the Republicans. Unlike Senator Jeffords’ switch which changed party control, I will not be an automatic 60th vote for cloture. For example, my position on Employees Free Choice (Card Check) will not change.

Whatever my party affiliation, I will continue to be guided by President Kennedy’s statement that sometimes Party asks too much. When it does, I will continue my independent voting and follow my conscience on what I think is best for Pennsylvania and America.

Redstate Sucks: All The Proof I Need

I'm a fan of Sirius' station, POTUS Politics, channel 110. On several occasions, I heard a reporter on POTUS make reference to the blog, Redstate.Com, so I thought in the interest of adding more balance to my politics, I'd give it a try.

It was just as I expected -- more right-wing bullshit, convinced that if they tell enough lies, they'll regain favor.

Typical of what you'd expect to find on a conservative blog -- attacks on unions, and it's there in spades. For example:

Well, we can’t say no one saw this one coming, but Obama has turned back rules that had been put in place to force unions to be more transparent in their financial reporting. These rules were meant to stop union fraud, theft, and embezzlement but in an effort to pay back his supporters, Obama has turned these rules back so that unions can find it easier to hide illicit financial transactions.

I'd like to think that you fell for the Republican press release, but it's obvious from the blog that you have resources. These rules weren't put in place to cause unions to be more transparent. These rules were put in place by the Bush administration to force unions to spend more of their time and energy complying with needless regulations, rather than representing their members against attacks by contributors to Republican candidates.

The smear continues with an attack on Deborah Greenfield, a former attorney with the AFL-CIO, now a member of the Obama administration:

She was against forcing unions to account for all their illicit cash and secret accounts then. Now that she is in charge of implementing such rules she has been a major part of eliminating them so that unions could more easily hide their financial dealings from union members and the government.

Illicit cash? What illicit cash? The wing nuts at Redstate didn't offer any examples. Apparently, any money used to defend workers against Republicans is illicit.

The Washington Times reports this expected turning back of transparency rules.

Oh good, that should make union members feel better. The Washington Times is about as "fair and balanced" as that other fake news organization.

So, what we see here is the Obama administration making more efforts to payback his supporters from the campaign. What could be a better gift than eliminating rules that keeps union criminality at a minimum?

No, what we see is an administration that's trying to alleviate some of the mischief of the prior administration. What we see is an attempt to balance the playing field. What we see is this administration trying to help America's working people, who will not stand idly by while the rich get richer, and the poor have to pay for it. We're watching. You've been warned.

Absentee Ballot Recap in NY-20

47% of the absentee ballots cast in NY-20 were from Republicans.

The Democrat, Scott Murphy, won 54% of absentees.

8 Years Is A Long Time

Minnesotans: You Should Be Ashamed

This Representative should be removed from office. If she's representative of her district, I'm gonna try to avoid that place!

Steele Should Resign

A March 9, 2009 report from FiveThirtyEight.com.

According to multiple former high-level RNC staffers familiar with the dynamics involved, Steele is unlikely to survive in the post if favored Republican Jim Tedisco loses his open-seat race to Democrat Scott Murphy. The special election, scheduled for March 31, is to fill a vacancy left when Kirsten Gillibrand took Hillary Clinton’s Senate seat.

If Tedisco loses, the ex-staffers said, “Steele is done.”

Completely, definitively?

“Absolutely.”

Today's news:

Assemblyman Jim Tedisco (R) concedes to Rep.-elect Scott Murphy (D); latest NY 20 count had Murphy leading Tedisco by 401 votes.

In a congressional district where Republicans have a 70,000 registration advantage, the more widely known Republican loses to a relative unknown. Game over. Republicans are effectively shut out in the northeast, and Steele made it a priority. Steal what you can, and make the Republicans credible in 2010 -- by quitting.

Nebraska's Nelson Still On The Wrong Side

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Secession for Idiots

I was shocked by the recent Rasmussen headline, Just 11% Favor Seceding From the Union.

Are you kidding me?

Eleven percent (11%) of Americans say they would vote for their state to secede from the United States and form an independent country, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey.

An additional 6% are undecided.

The debate on secession seems to have gained attention largely due to the stupid comments of Texas Governor Rick Perry last week. I'm certainly not the "sharpest knife in the kitchen", but I learned enough in elementary school to know the Civil War was a terrible, tragic period in American history. While you can argue that the end of slavery was a positive result of the war, it seems a legislative or judicial proposal would have been preferable, considering the tremendous loss of young American lives. What brought the war about? I'm sure the answers to this question are too many to consider in this posting, but I would argue it was due largely due to the Southern insistence on secession.

That 11% of the American people favor secession in 2009, and 6% more are undecided is frightening. One hundred and fourty-four years later, could one of the root causes be the same?

Is race in America in 2009 as divisive as it was in 1861? I'd certainly like to think not. In fact, I would like to believe that an overwhelming majority of the American people think we're better off now than we were at the beginning of the civil war. Just what percentage of people would think race is what divides us, and supports the destruction of the union of 50 states as we know it?

My guess is about 11%.