You have got to be kidding me.
That’s what I’m sitting here thinking. I’ve been pretty well buffeted by the same psychic shock that has been infecting us all for the last week or two. One loss after another. This crazy spiral downward. I don’t read a lot of hope in the voices of my fellow progressives here. I don’t have a lot of hope to offer. But just when I get to the point where I don’t think it could get any worse, it gets a little bit worse.
I’ve spent the last few hours hanging out at the pond. Jumped in to talk with SusanHu et al about the Cheney shooting. Stayed when BooMan proudly announced a live appearance with the Democratic Congressional candidate (MI-08) Jim Marcinkowski.
I live in the 8th District. I’ve been doing my best to oppose incumbent Mike Rogers. He is basically a smarter, more dangerous version of Bush/Cheney. Seems like a true believer. Seems to think that America is at risk, and that war and torture are the answers. Is convinced that the free market is the answer to our plummet to the bottom in the global economy. Knows that the free market is going to fix health care. Absolutely the antithesis of almost every idea that anyone here has ever expressed.
So, naturally, I was pretty pleased to get a chance to evaluate the Democratic alternative. I mean there is still a primary, and I’ve heard that there may be other Democratic contenders. But Marcinkowski seems to be the party favorite, from what I can gather. The one with a slim chance to unseat Rogers.
I’ll admit that my own diligence and dedication to the political process is pathetic. I am not active in any campaign or party, other than issue oriented activity. And until BooMan announced that Marcinkowski was appearing here, I hadn’t taken the initiative to research the prospective Democratic nominee. And worse, perhaps, I haven’t even waited for the good candidate to finish answering all of the questions before coming to a pretty clear conclusion.
If you are a progressive person, living in Michigan’s 8th Congressional District, you are pretty much assured to be a) casting a vote for someone who has spent a lifetime demonstrating values that do not politically align with your own, b) casting your vote for a third party candidate who has no chance of winning, or c) staying home and watching television when other people are casting their vote.
Maybe my background research is flawed. I mean, it isn’t like I did an exhaustive search or anything. I went to Wikipedia and typed in “James Marcinkowski” and got a biography. So maybe it is flawed. Maybe it has been hacked by Republican activists to make me think that Jim and I don’t really share much in common politically. But the biography it lays out for my most likely option at the ballot box makes me want to laugh out loud. Here is what is says:
Marcinkowski was born in Hamtramck, Michigan. After finishing high school in 1974, Marcinkowski, then 18, clerked in the Computer Systems Division of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. In 1974, he enlisted in the United States Navy, where, as an Operations Specialist he became an expert in anti-submarine warfare, was an Air Controller, and collected shipboard intelligence on the Soviet Navy during the Cold War. He served aboard the USS Rathburne FF-1057 and was a member of the commissioning crew of the USS John Rodgers DD-983. Following assignments to the 3rd and 7th (Pacific) and the 2nd (Atlantic) Fleets, Marcinkowski returned to Michigan where he earned his B.A. degree in Political Science from Michigan State University in 1982 and later, a law degree from the University of Detroit School of Law.
After graduating from law school, Marcinkowski joined the CIA. He completed the Career Trainee Program and the Operations Course to become a case officer in the Agency’s Directorate of Operations. He served as an Operations Officer in Washington, D.C. and Central America. It was in the CIA that he first met Valerie Plame, a classmate whose identity as an undercover CIA officer would later be exposed by the George W. Bush White House.
After leaving the CIA in 1989, Marcinkowski joined the Prosecutor’s Office in Oakland County, Michigan where as an executive staff attorney, he established the first special prosecution unit for domestic violence. In 1993 Marcinkowski abrubtly left the office, refusing to cooperate with the criminal probe of another assistant prosecutor who was arrested in a gambling raid. He then publicly accused his former boss, Prosecutor Richard Thompson, of corruption and demanded an investigation by Michigan Attorney General Frank Kelly. After a review of the allegations, Kelly, a Democrat, declined the request citing a lack of “specific information” that Thompson, a Republican, broke any laws. That same year, Marcinkowski filed a lawsuit against Thompson claiming defamation and violation of his First Amendment rights. The case was settled for only $48,500. Source: Detroit Free Press [1].
Later, as a Deputy City Attorney for the City of Royal Oak, Marcinkowski obtained the first criminal conviction of suicide doctor Jack Kevorkian. He is a member of Teamsters Local 214.
A former resident of Oxford, Michigan, he unsuccessfully ran as a Republican candidate for state representative in 1992 and township trustee in August 2000. [2] A former member of the Young Republicans, he made a $250 campaign contribution to George W. Bush in 1999. Marcinkowski also made a total of $350 in contributions to Republican Michael Cox’ successful 2002 run for Michigan Attorney General.
Marcinkowski, a resident of Lake Orion, Michigan, is now seeking the Democratic nomination for U.S. Representative from Michigan’s 8th Congressional District (see map). The district is currently represented by Mike J. Rogers, a Republican from Brighton.
I’m sorry. I don’t want to laugh. But what the hell else can I do. My “opposition” candidate has been a Republican for his entire adult life. At least until 2000 (the last time he ran as a Republican).
He, according to his answers in the forum, was the Young Republican leader at my campus (Michigan State University) for the election of Ronald Reagan. I remember the young Republicans at Michigan State. They made me laugh then. They still make me laugh today. They are laughable. I can sympathize with someone trying to disassociate themselves with that group. I just don’t want to have to vote for that person.
Was it youthful error? An honest lack of understanding about where one might fall on political questions? Well. Probably not. Since he ran for office as a Republican in 1992 and 2000. I’m curious if he filled out any of the “Right to Life” pledges that are sent out to all candidates. It seems to me, that if one wants to run as a Republican in this state, one is almost sure to have filled out these pledges assuring the good religious people of Michigan about where one stands. I didn’t wait long enough for Mr. Marcinkowski’s answer on this issue. I’m sure if I’m wrong and Mr. Marcinkowski has always supported a woman’s right to choose, and continues to do so, my error can and will be rectified. Or even if he didn’t used to support that right, but now recognizes that his earlier position was politically disadvan…, er I mean, wrong as a matter of principle, that will be corrected for the record.
Maybe he left the bankrupt Republican party behind in 2000. Or maybe it was after 2002, when he donated to the campaign of Republican Attorney General Mike Cox (his personal friend, according to his responses in the forum). I guess I should just be happy that he is on our side now.
Should I be troubled that he served in the CIA in Central America in the 1980s? (I don’t know that I really want to learn what he was doing there, but I’m sure he didn’t mean any of it anyway.) That he was a city prosecutor who went after Jack Kevorkian? (hey, it was just his job — I’m sure he did not really want to put good old Dr. Death in jail.) Naw. I should just be happy I have an alternative to vote for.
I don’t mean to be negative. I don’t. It just strikes me as funny. These are apparently the options we get. If I really cared, I would be out at the Democratic meetings trying to help the party to elect progressive candidates.
The only reason I write it down is because it is the first time I’ve ever been kicked in the face with it this hard. There has been a growing cynicism in me. An honest and growing belief that the system is fixed. That it doesn’t matter. That whatever powers that be — corporate forces, or historical forces, or something I don’t fully understand — exist independent of my thoughts and actions. And that these forces are unstoppable. So why bother? Why fight? Why care? Like that feeling I’ve read about that falls over prey animals when they are about to get eaten by a predator. A calming shock. I’ve been on the brink of this feeling for so long. But meeting my options face to face, so to speak, here on my home blog, I’m pretty sure I’m ready to lay down now. Be quiet. Because it doesn’t matter who wins. The difference between Mike and Jim and Joe and Mary. Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dum.
Just my two cents. I’m sure I’ll be back for another kick in the teeth in a few days.
[And thanks for the event BooMan, truly, and sorry to be the tempest in the teapot. Probably not so good for business here — and for that I apologize.]
I imagine you’re feeling kind of the same way I felt when the field was cleared for Casey here in PA. Pretty shitty.
I’m sorry, but this “fighting Dems” terminology is starting to immediately make me think “anti-progressive” every time I hear it. And I wish it weren’t, but it is.
Ah-yuh!
I don’t think I could in good conscience vote for Casey, either. And I’m pretty well satisfied that I’ll have to find someone other than this guy or just hang out at home.
We (Americans) are all so hell bent on fighting. I’m ashamed. When I’ve got to talk to DTF. I always feel I’ve got to apologize for the whole damned country. Why is it we need to bomb our way out of every problem that comes along. Can’t people just get the idea, that to see a war plane flying overhead at any place other than a football game, is a damn terrifying feeling. No one likes the fear of that. At least no one who may presumably be bombed. It just sucks. What’s so hard to get about that concept. Bombing sucks. Don’t want anymore tough guys. Or tough ladies. Want someone who will use commone sense. International law. Etc.
Ugh! I’ve taken to lecturing Cabin Girl at near midnight. Not a good use of energy. Ugh! Sorry.
Preaching to the choir, as the saying goes. I feel your pain.
Everyone cheer up. Even if we are stuck with some of these shitheads in the general elections we should be able to push this debate to the left. Not that it can go any farther to the right. Then again maybe it can and that makes our work this year extremely important. I will give this one more chance if we gain nothing or little this midterm then I’m going to get very discouraged.
As for DTF when he or she decides to do any kind of moral evaluation of his or her own culture or country then I will listen to his or her criticism.
BTW Joe at your past recommendation I have just received a People’s History of the United States from Powell’s. Just finishing Lies my Teacher Told Me its mind expanding and very relevant to this administration.
BostonJoe got my brother reading Howard Zinn
Just to clarify, this was what he said that he convicted Jack of:
I’m not familiar with that case (or any others that he may have prosecuted), so I’m not sure if he was ‘going after him’ for other charges and had to settle for this or not. But he did indicate that he thinks that the government should be less involved in right-to-die cases.
I don’t know what that means exactly, but I think that, barring any other information, in this aspect you’re portraying him a little bit unfairly.
But look at the vague/misleading wording about that on his website, and compare it with his anti-Schiavo statement in the diary. Is it just me, or is that odd?
No, I agree it is odd. I’m just saying that his position is very unclear, and I hate jumping to conclusions.
That being said, I also am sick of political doublespeak where people talk out of both sides of their mouth. And unless he can come out and say what he really thinks clearly, one way or the other, I’m inclined to agree that the evidence points towards a position that I disagree with.
Really! I have more respect for a person who comes right out and says exactly what they mean, as opposed to beating around the bush/trying to please everyone. In other words, don’t waste my time. I am sick of bullshit!
And you convict someone on what you know you can prove, not what you want to go after them for. Think Fitzgerald and Libby. I don’t remember enough about that case to really speak of it, but I did think that answer was disengenious.
That’s true, but again, I don’t know the facts of the case. I’m not defending him, I just think that jumping to conclusions is a mistake.
Unless of course, he doesn’t leave any choice but to jump to conclusions. He is apparently going to finish answering questions over the next couple of days, so I’ll wait and see if he gives a better answer. Or more specifically, a real answer.
I don’t mean to be argumentative. I’ve been in that mode pretty much all day. So forgive my tone.
But here is a snip from our good candidate’s website, where he provides his own packaged information about who he is:
Seems to me that the language he uses in this excerpt stresses that he was the first to convict the “suicide” doctor. Doesn’t mention that it was for R&O in that snippet. Says he got him for R&O (fighting officers) when addressing my questions, about the right to die. Now says that he thinks Schiavo case is just wackiness. Sounds like a political opportunist extraordinaire, to me. Uses language in campaign materials saying I got “suicide doc” — which can be read by those who think the state ought to have a say in end of life decisions as meaning he supports them.
Sure. It is unclear. But he has been a dyed in the wool Republican for his entire adult life, until just recently. So I, I guess my larger point is, I get to choose between a absolute self-professed wing nut (Rogers) or a born again Democrat who has professed to share my values for just the last few years of his long life — a profession of faith that I find lacking in the written details he has provided to this point, and certainly lacking in deeds.
And when that is your choice, well, that is a great choice, huh? Doesn’t it kind of make those things Nader was saying six years or more ago, about there really not being a choice sound kind of true. It does to me.
Not saying that third parties are the way. Just that the system is irretrievably broken, perhaps.
Joe, you haven’t been argumentative, IMO. You were and still are raising legitimate ?’s. As a resident of the 8th, I still feel that I was and still am, and will continue to do.
Dr. Kevorkian was tried more than once on different charges. (Not familiar w/specifics.)
I thought his answer on restoring bi-partisanship was odd.
I considered popping in to ask him what that meant but it was turning into a zoo, and its not my district, so I didn’tl
Does that mean “I’ll spend plenty of time voting with my former compatriots on the other side of the aisle after I’m elected in a voter backlash against them”?
My very own Liberman. I will be so pleased.
Like we really need another one!
I honestly don’t know what it meant. It made no sense to me as written but I’m willing to listen to an explanation. I don’t like to impute bad motives to candidates where they might not be there. But I really don’t know what he was saying here.
well, I don’t find it odd to talk about restoring bipartisanism. It’s what most Americans want.
Unfortunately, we have a lot of frog-marching to do before that can take place.
One thing I am sure of is that Jim is committed to avenging Joe and Valerie Wilson’s abuse.
I don’t find it odd to talk about restoring bipartisanship either. I just didn’t know what he meant by an advocacy system like a court system. You can advocate all you want in a court system but in the end the judge (or jury) decides. I’m not even saying that he may not have a good idea. I just didn’t understand it and would like to hear more. If someone else understands, please enlighten me.
I think he means that government functions best when the two parties are forced to work together to get things done.
Maybe he did. I don’t think you and I, tonight, are going to resolve the question. I’m not even sure its a question that matters except that, for me, it goes to whether or not the candidate has a practical grasp of how the politics of the congress works and what is possible and what will be difficult. Which is always something to evaluate.
As I said, I considered popping in to ask him but I figured I would simply be adding to the multiplicity of questions, statements and side conversations he was trying to respond to.
Can I ask you this? Honestly, don’t you get the sneaking suspicion that this man is a Republican? I mean, perhaps he is adopting the label Democrat, because it suits him to run in this district.
If you saw my introductory post, part of what I said was that people that used to be Republicans are now identifying themselves as Democrats. It is a small re-alignment now (limited to vets and intelligence officers), that may portend a larger realignment that is coming in 2007.
You are going to see this when one party goes too far. Back in 1994, Richard Shelby and Nighthorse Campbell switched to the GOP. We may see some Senators switching back.
When you ask me if I think he is a Republican, I can only say that he used to be a Republican. He is running on fair trade, fixing the intelligence agencies, restoring sanity to our foreign policy, cleaning up the ethics problems, etc.
Is he a progressive? No. He’s not. Maybe we can learn him something. Maybe you can’t vote for him because of his position on one or more issues. I don’t know.
But one feature of a winning majority party is that vets and intelligence officers are willing to be associated with it, are accepted within it, and can win office in it.
So, please keep that in mind.
I see this as different than running anti-choice candidates in pro-choice states because they have better fund-raising potential and name recognition than progressive alternatives. That, my friend, is the real bullshit.
I truly respect your political knowledge. I’ve come to over these months. And I see what you are saying about moderate Republicans getting scared/agitated, and bailing. Perhaps defecting. So perhaps in some political calculus, I understand your willingness to embrace this candidate. Perhaps as you will ultimately embrace Casey.
But what have we won then, BooMan. What is the great victory. If we win, we win what? We have a centrist, or perhaps center-right “Democratic” congress? Maybe we get a centrist President. And we progressive peoples are supposed to believe that is a victory.
I maintain this thesis — mad as a hatter. This tool you have here is a great tool. With this site, and the good progressive people who stand here behind you, you have access to incredible visibility. If a leader used this tool effectively, a true progressive movement could be born, quickly and effectively. A populist movement. And if the Democratic party is not smart or adaptive enough to do it, you could be BooMan.
The progressive blogosphere is boiling over with discontent. I don’t think I’m alone. And I don’t think that we are an insignificant force. I think we need a leader. You are a proponent of the “Great Man” theory of history, are you not? Or at least you were contemplating writing on that topic days ago.
The BooMoose Party, I say. Whimsical. Rushmore-esque. I am not kidding. The revolution is bubbling right under your feet. You feel it, don’t you?
The progressive blogosphere is boiling over with discontent. I don’t think I’m alone. And I don’t think that we are an insignificant force. I think we need a leader. You are a proponent of the “Great Man” theory of history, are you not? Or at least you were contemplating writing on that topic days ago.
The BooMoose Party, I say. Whimsical. Rushmore-esque. I am not kidding. The revolution is bubbling right under your feet. You feel it, don’t you?
I’ve been advocating something along those lines (under the label “American Solidarity”) for several months – including today.
I have seen some of this, and will endeavor to read more. From what I’ve read I have liked your ideas very much. I am a bit scatter-brained on the topic of political revolution at the moment. So please forgive my own inattention. But I will read.
One of the reasons why I am identifying more and more w/3rd parties. Just seems to me that the lack of response by anyone re: an citzen’s concern tells me that the time is ripe for a 3rd party. And I’m comfortable w/that–maybe that is the only way to get real change. I dunno…
And that’s one more vote toward impeachment, which is what really counts right now.
And that’s why I responded to Joe as I did below.
I know, but just because I can accept the ugly truth of the matter doesn’t mean I have to pretend to like it.
I agree, politics is ugly. The myth is that it has ever been different.
One thing I am sure of is that Jim is committed to avenging Joe and Valerie Wilson’s abuse.
BooMan, I believe you on that, but it isn’t enough. People are also concerned about the economy, health care, education, and none of those subjects were adequately addressed. I mean, I live have lived in the 8th for years. And the fact of the matter is that people really aren’t that concerned about Joe and Valerie Wilson.
The demographics for the 8th can be decieving, as it is a very large district–part of Inham, part of Oakland, and all of Livingston and Shiawassee Counties. And the concerns are different, depending on the county that you live in. (Knowing the area that Jim M. lives in, and living in a different county, I can say that they are, for all practical purposes, 2 different worlds–I am not familiar enough w/Ingham county or as much as Shiawassee to make a judgement on that.)
What people want is not more of the same, but they want real solutions–that is what I was trying to get across re: my ?’s re: a single-payer health care system. And I will say that I was disappointed with Jim M.’s lack of knowledge re: health care.
Laughing Now.
I mean, talking with you, my friends, I’m more convinced.
This guy should be running against Rogers in the Republican primary. He may be unhappy where his party has gone. We are too. But he doesn’t seem like anything close to a Democrat. At least not in the traditional sense of that word that I’m familiar with. I mean, unless a young Reagan Repulican is fully prepared to eat a whole lot of crap (like saying, I was brainwashed — like Patty Hearst and the SLA) then I just have to laugh at his candidacy a little. Perhaps he will withdraw after seeing how much we chuckled at him.
OK let me play devil’s advocate.
You really don’t know much about him. The format tonight was not conducive to getting real responses. (You would think that it would be, but oddly it wasn’t). Politicians ALWAYS talk in vagueries and its not always because they have something to hide. Before you completely write him off, talk to him directly.
I bet he’d let you interview him and you’d get to spend some one on one time with him. Then you could report back.
You were right about your three choices. I wouldn’t recommend sitting out an election when, from what I’ve heard of Mike Rogers, even a moderate Republican would be an improvement.
I agree with Mary.
I don’t know MI-8 well, but is there a reason that a progressive could not get elected there (other than the typical establishment-candidate reasons)? I know that Ingham county was the only one other than Washtenaw that voted against the gay marriage proposal in 2004…it seems that there is at least some seed of liberalism there.
I don’t have answers. To be sure.
I decline Mary’s invitation to interview him. I am not a journalist. I am not a politician. At best, I am a voter. This was my one best opportunity to talk to the man. I don’t plan on stalking him so I can be personally satisfied that he will well represent me. And his answers, for me, as a voter were wholly inadequate. I’m more convinced now, than I was when this day started, that I have no real choice if the election is between Marcinkowski and Rogers.
And I am personally done with that old addage, I’ll take the lesser of two evils. I have to vote for Jim because Mike is so awful. I think that our voting that way for these past years is exactly why we get candidates like Jim. Because we have decided we will come to the center, or in this case, cross the line all the way over to the moderate wing of the opposite party, and call that a choice. I’m not supporting him. What is he going to do during the election to change my mind? Swear an oath that his entire life up until 2000 was a misguided falsehood? The guy stands for everything I’ve always stood against. And his being more electable because this is a tough district — that answer just doesn’t do it for me. I guess, if they are counting on my vote for victory, then we’ll just be stuck with Mike. I’ll feel better about having Mike, who at least is honest about where he stands. Really. I mean I really dislike these people running our country, but at least I think he is somewhat sincere in the batshit loopy philosophy he follows.
I hate to be so forceful, but this guy, our candidate, in my humble opinion, is a clown. That’s just my opinion. But truly. Reagen youth to Republican candiate in 2000, to concerned Democrat in ’06. Not without some deeds. Sorry. I just can’t get past it.
Why don’t you sleep on it. Who knows, when you wake up in the morning maybe you’ll decide to enter the race yourself.
Or, you’ll realize your vast blogger talents that equal any so called journalists and reconsider talking to him personally. This was not a good forum in which to make a decision. I understand your frustration with the Democrats (believe me, I do). But you have to work with what you have or you have to create an alternative.
So just sleep on it.
did you read either of the speeches we posted?
think about it.
I did. They kind of make me sick, when I compare them to the biography.
Chomsky says, and I tend to take him at his word, perhaps more than I should, if you want to learn something about a politician, don’t look at what he says, look at what he does. Looking at Marcinkowski’s life, what he says now sounds to me a lot like hypocrisy.
I can only say that both Susan and I have talked to him on the phone, and that I think is a nice, funny, humble person. I can’t vouch for what is in his heart, or account for his conversion.
I look at these upcoming elections as our best last chance to put out the fire that is consuming our country, poisoning our national debate, and squandering our national legacy.
If Jim wants to fight on my side I am willing to fight on his side.
In 2006 I am a zero-sum guy. I don’t want no fence-sitters and I don’t want no abstainers. I respect people that draw different lines, but I do not agree with them. Either we win a house of Congress or we perish.
The more people that realize this, both on the left and in the center, the better our chances.
What will we have won? We will have won subpeona power. My life, my life, for subpeona power. It’s the only way, BJ.
Correction. I hadn’t read both speeches that were posted. I didn’t realive there was more than one posted. Went back and read the one I missed (assuming there was only one I missed). Doesn’t change my answer much. In fact, just ads flame to my fire.
Well. I’m glad you like him. Glad you can endorse him. Can understand your point about the power of the subpoena.
My suspicion is that even if the Democrats do take back Congress, it will be with such a centrist or center-right group of people, that there will be little difference between the policy now and the policy then. You think these hawkish Democrats are going to stand up and hound this President on National Security issues from ’06-’08, while they are trying to get pro-war Hillary Clinton nominated.
I wouldn’t worry too much about losing this one vote. I am loony. The absurdist Flying Spaghetti Monster vote is rarely a reliable Democratic vote, or so I’ve been told.
If Hillary runs the country the way that Bill ran the country we may find the whole transition to be positively frustrating when it comes to retribution, but we will have little ability telling the difference between Hillary and Bush. I mean, get real.
How did you get so beaten down, Joe?
First of all, how can you demand that the country elect a progressive congress when we have a far-right government and a daily assault of pro-GOP, anti-leftist propaganda being piled on the electorate.
We have wandered a long way off the path and we aren’t gonna get back on it by wishful thinking. We have to have investigations that uncover the wrongdoing and have it force-fed into the media until nearly every American agrees that Bush was worse, far worse, than Nixon. Do you honestly think Jim is going to be an obstacle to correcting the historical record?
He might be an obstacle on some policy issues that we prefer. But the man is not a happy camper when it comes to the people that refused to listen to the CIA, went to war without a plan or the right intelligence, blamed the CIA, outed his friend, and continue to make blunder after blunder.
We need a majority. If its center-left, so fucking be it. We’ll work on that problem if we are lucky enough to have it.
I’m feeling a long way past beaten down Boo. No big deal. It just is what it is. You can’t save every rat off a sinking ship.
Do you think Hillary will be running on an anti-war with Iran policy? Or am end the war in Iraq policy? I don’t. She hasn’t come off her support for the flawed war yet. Politics right. She needs to be tough, or she won’t be electable. So I’m just saying that the things she needs to do to get elected in terms of policy positions make her a less than attractive candidate from the eyes of a progressive. Better than Bush. Yes. Of course. But by degrees. No real change from the military impearial power I really think we have become. Maybe that was just rhetoric with me once. Now I believe that.
So do I think we will be at peace with Hillary. Wouldn’t bet on it. I’m not saying there is no difference.
Do I think Jim we be an obstacle to investigating Bush. Well, I could go on what he tells me in speeches. About how hard charging fired up he is to get America back. But I don’t know if I trust his words, friend. Really.
Here is what he said in his speech, about his time with the CIA:
And here is what some very limited research tells me (most of which I already know, but have forgotten the details):
So tell me how I should distinguish between his rhetoric and his words. And I’m not accusing him personally of any conduct. But he was in the CIA in the 1980s in Nicaragua. So, this is the guy I want going after the torturers. Not me. Not so much.
So you say we need a majority. I say a majority of what? People called “Democrats” who don’t stand for what you and I stand for. Liberman and Casey and Marcinkowski (who I’d lay good money today ain’t got a prayer — if we are just being honest).
I don’t know what I’m saying Boo. I’m tired. I want to believe in something. Even if it is just myself. And I can’t vote, personally, for this. It is just a matter of silly principle or pride. Perhaps I’m shooting myself, and your party, in the foot. But this cat. He don’t get it with me. And I appreciate your passion and position.
No edit. distinguish between rhetoric and deeds i mean. blah blah blah.
I’m a glass half full kind of guy.
I see a guy that proudly carried out the policies of Ronald Reagan in the 1980’s who still sees Bush’s America as totally unrecognizable. For him, Bush is not some natural extension of Reaganism, but a solid break and wrong turn.
When I consider the amount of people that are coming over to our side that hold this position I am encouraged.
On Nicaragua, you are absolutely correct. The rhetoric is misleading and a whitewash. Unlike the right, we pick up on that and criticize our candidates for it. I prefer rhetoric that is as free of factual error as possible. However, he still is making a valid point.
It’s your district, so you know it much better than me. But, what I haven’t heard is you tell me that Mike Rogers is ripe for the picking. Instead, you seem to be telling me that the seat is rock-solid red and it will hard as hell to win it.
So, I’m sorry that you feel disappointed in your choices. But as you noted elsewhere, you have to get involved locally before you have much of a leg to stand on in complaining about who the nominees are.
If a progressive gets in the race against Jim, go talk to her and see if you want to help her. Tell us about them. But, at the end of the day, we need a majority.
I don’t disagree with anything you’ve been saying. You are pragmatic. You are trying.
But this guy is a Reaganite. And if Reaganite’s were to flood over and take over your party, then it is no longer your party. Right? Because you hate the things that Reagan stood for. (I mean I’ll admit, Reagan at least had the ability to appear sincere instead of smirking like a chimp). But you hated those policies. They were bad, bad policies. And you know Jim will support those policies, right? Even if he tries to put lipstick on a pig.
And that is bastardization, to say, “Yeah, okay, so he lied a little in his speech, or fudged, but heck, we need a majority.” Fuck that. Bush is a liar. We hate him for it. Better to lose than to accept that.
I’m tired and incoherent. I think there is another candidate in this race. I’ll look into it. I’m told that the demographics of district are just stacked against Dems. Alexander, last candidate, got something like 38% of the vote, and that was 8% points higher than expected. It would cost millions to buy enough press to equalize race.
My early optimism was from the dynamics of our country. We are so fucked up, I personally sense that a change is in air. But, I’m quite sure I’m misleading my self. Every poll I see tells me that there is still much fear and much desire to be protected from terrorists. And with the demographics, I would be willing to bet cash that Rogers will be it, no matter my talk or desire, or yours of Jim’s for that matter.
Glass is looking more than half empty from here. It is dry. I’ve drank the last drop and I’m still trying to squeeze more out, but I’m thirsty.
Going to bed. Sorry to be such a wet blanket for your kind efforts at bringing our candidates out to meet us.
No problem. I gotta get some some sleep now too.
But this guy is a Reaganite. And if Reaganite’s were to flood over and take over your party, then it is no longer your party.
A single-payer health care system? And a woman’s right to choose? Or disability rights? Adequate funding for social programs for MI? He didn’t even consider addressing these individually, let alone give specific answers.
I’d really like to be proved wrong.
Now, I am going to bed!
You know, I think the last few comments in this thread really sum up how many people are feeling. We desperately need to win control, but for FSM’s sake, can’t we have some candidates that we’d truly like to see win? So many of the choices aren’t ones we feel like making (worse, or worser?). In some cases, there really is no choice for me.
And BooMan’s got a point, as much as I hate to admit it. We need some kind of majority, even if it’s center-right, to even have a shot at getting Bushco out of the palace. And I don’t feel real comfortable relying on more Republicans to get us out of the Republican-created and dominated mess we’re in. But that’s where we are. Rock, meet hard place.
No wonder you’re bummed.
I am just feeling that some slights of this system are too much to bear.
In another way, if you look at it just right, it has the comic value of absurdity.
Little did I realize, as I spraypainted subversive anti-Bush I statements, and anti-Centrial American policy messages, across the MSU campus sidewalks, and laughed at the young Republican corporate wannabes, that the candidate I would be forced to vote for, in a far more frightening time, would be one of those young Republicans, who shipped off to Central America to do Bush I’s bidding.
It is a particularly perfect, ironic hell. I will not cast a ballot for him. I can’t.
daughter is a very lucky little girl, who may think she is proud of her daddy today, but has no idea just how proud she is going to be when she gets a little older. She may be in danger of bursting, so keep towels and rose water handy.
You are a man of principle, and despite all your denials, I will continue to accuse you of being a daily bather, if not a closet flosser.
I’ll be brief, since we have ended up on the right-hand margin.
I can assure you that I was up late, and up early, and that I smell an odor most unpleasant. This is not just beautiful language of self-aggrandizement. It is a report from the brink of manic-depression.
And, as much as I would like my daughters to be proud, I don’t know that they will, or that I’m deserving for writing anything here. They are smart beautiful human beings, being shaped by the forces as they are in this country. I am one influence. Perhaps not the most healthy one, for their sake of fitting in. But I love them. Like every Iraqi or Iranian loves their own. So it is pretty simple really.
It is often true irony that you must use people you dislike to win a war. But if you can recognize that you are using them, that your relationship is not necessarily long term, and that in the end you don’t have to end up like them, you might actually win the war.
George Washington didn’t win the American Revolution because he was a great military leader. He won it because the French came in and helped him. Did he like the French? No. Did we become French? No. Did the French do it because they were altruistic and wanted Democracy? No.
Is this candidate using you to gain whatever ends he wants? Maybe. Probabaly yes. Can you (we) use him for our own ends? Yes. Is it forever? No. Hell, its the shortest national term that someone can run for. A congressional term is 2 years. TWO years. If you can move your district only slightly left in November you have the chance to move it even more left in two more years.
Does electing him in November mean that you can’t start working on finding his successor in December? No. And you should. Because that will either move him further left; or you will find a replacement. I feel quite certain that he is NOT going to seduce you to move right.
Sorry to go at you this early in the morning. But stop wallowing in misery and get up and do something to make it all stop.
I like your GW analogy.
Nasty, brutish, and short version = Suck it up, bro.
(I’m sorry, it was the caffeine–first in DAYS–talking!)
of the politicians may not resonate as well today as it did to the grandparents of those who today languish in the same hovels, and weep as their grandchildren huddle under expressways or are subsumed into the prison system.
And it is not going to resonate as well even with all those who are more fortunate.
Joe is definitely a minority within a minority, though, and I think you can be confident that the majority of that minority will find the same inspiration in the speeches of the politicians that they have done, and will send them money as long as they can before they too are downwardly mobilized, when they will find joy in making the necessary sacrifices for the sake of the war on terror.
If you have a better suggestion at the current juncture, I’m listening.
here on the margin. A marginalized voice, on the margins or a marginal blog. Very sympolic. But this is where it needs to go.
I was just about to sit down and write BooMan an e-mail. But I’ll put it here, and cut and paste.
The better suggestion is just this: We — good progressive people of conscience — need to build a new system. Because this one is corrupted. Broken.
Is this pie in the sky? I say yes, and no. And I was going to put it to BooMan like this.
Let’s make a bargain. I’m a betting man. And I don’t consider myself wise or definitely right beyond question. The bargain is this. We’ll give the Democrats one last try in ’06. A last chance. Because they have failed us ad nauseum. But they seem like the only practical option in ’06. So we give them a chance. We work for them. Contribute. Write for them. I support the Reaganite. With all my efforts. And if the Democrats win in ’06 — either House — we give them six months to act on things we know are important. Just a show of good faith — for us progressives. Investigate the President for all crimes. Start passing laws to assist people not corporations. Simple stuff. And if they do — you win. I was wrong. I am glad you all were right the the Dems were our last best hope.
And the flip side of the bet — if the Dems lose in ’06, after we have given them are all, as we have for these past years. Lose another battle. With their fighting Dems and lack of vision. Or if they actually win control of a house of Congress, and fail to act within six months, to our mutual satisfaction. Then I win the bet. And we good people of progressive conscience form and build a party that embodies our vision. A replacement for this husk of a party.
Call it pie in the sky. I reject it. Here is a short and simple plan. I truly believe that it could not only work, but that it would be worth working for. A leader (BooMan) steps forward and issues a statement of our principles, in the aftermath of the ’06 loss. The BooMoose Party. A new progressive party. We harnass the power of the blogosphere. You know it is roiling with discontent. I am convinced that we could have headlining diaries on every progressive blog. With our call for a change. We have a clear platform, we roll it out, and we direct people here. To the extent that these calls are shouted down, perhaps banned a dKos after a few days (as they would be, that is okay). Many Dems will be afraid. But with our organizational power, we can create a spark large enough to be seen, and all those who feel as we feel will no where to find us. And we build a party. District by district. Bloggers as candidates. School boards. Township halls. State houses. Congress. And eventually a President. Not bullshit. Just truth. People are sick of bullshit. Look around the world. Venezuela. Bolivia. The Ukraine. People are pouring into the streets in opposition to corporate controlled government. It is time. My experience with Jim Marcinkowski here just further solidifies it for me. It is time. I am ready now. But I can wait ten months for the writing to show itself on the wall.
Do we win in one yeay? Or five? Or ten? Or do we die trying? I don’t know. But it is a good and true vision of a possible future.
We need a leader. It ain’t Kos, we know. And I know BooMan is a pragmatic and practical man. And it will not be easy to convince him to lead such a thing. But I believe he may be what our country needs. Right now. He is almost as sick as I am with Democrats who stand for little. At least that is how I read his comments. He just believes in the system — that it is our only hope for change. But a practical man will not continue to bang his head into a wall forever.
So that is my bet. Shake on it?
Isn’t it hard to cave in even if we promise ourselves that it’s only for this one last time? I am in agreement with you Joe. I’m sick of voting for unprincipled bags of useless air. But we do have a serious quandry don’t we? Honestly my instict tells me that this country needs a baptism by fire to purge itself of it’s last vestiges of a broken and criminal system. But then…I waver because little Adolph has his eyes on my kids and yours.
I remain undecided.
We’ll give the Democrats one last try in ’06. A last chance. Because they have failed us ad nauseum.
I have a ?–the dems have not proved themselves to our satisfaction, despite all the shit that gwb has pulled. So, why give them 2 more years to try? If that is the case that we have to “settle” for DINO’s, we are losing what we really are asking for.
Look, on how many votes have the dems failed? More than I can count. I say the hell with them now. Go 3rd party now. Maybe they need to lose in order to learn/accept the fact that we are sick and tired of bullshit lies and the carrot and stick approach.
And, here’s another possiblity that I don’t recall being mentioned. The underlying thesis of this diary and the comments is that Marcinkowski can’t be trusted, in light of his history. So why reward untrustworthiness with a vote? I don’t get it!
of this comment
I saw that turn of a phrase. It made me realize that I have yet to see my bathroom this morning. I will take small steps toward the revolution. First, brush teeth. Etc.
Joe, I heard him speak twice. The first time, he sounded like he had everything together. The second time raised very serious questions in my mind. In short, I had changed my mind. Despite that, I was here yesterday, with an open mind–I have questions that were not answered. And I am not happy with that.
Votes have to be earned, not taken for granted. And that is how I perceive the situation and I am not happy with it. My intention is to vote for a 3rd party candidate, and I am leaning toward the Greens.
Fact of the matter is that I am not at all happy w/the Dems for a number of reasons. Because of that, I cannot support them and make no apologies for that. My opinion as a resident of MI 8th was ignored–just like it has been w/Rogers as congresscritter.
I just don’t see enough of a difference between the two.
.
About an hour ago, it’s now just past 8:00AM local time, and I have been reading some diaries and comments. Who are you responding to BJ?
Meet PokiePokey Peanut Productions presents…
“Answer the Question”
with host Brian James
and co-host James Marcinkowski
Pokey Peanut Productions is proud to present a preview of the web archive of the hit new radio show “Answer the Question” with host Brian James. Pokey is working hard on the full-fledged website.
Features will include:
“But I will not let myself be reduced to silence.”
▼ ▼ ▼ MY DIARY
Anybody who is still awake Oui. 🙂
You don’t miss much, do you, oui? 🙂
.
When someone butts into this community with a derogatory remark to BostonJoe, without any proper introduction, I figure I’ll look up his/her upbringing at address listed. I was indeed not surprised. (User ID3080 :: NEW)
It disturbs me when something is out of place! LOL“But I will not let myself be reduced to silence.”
▼ ▼ ▼ MY DIARY
That was no bigee to me Oui. I appreciate the support, but I just kind of figured from the tenor of the comments that this was a cyber version of someone I have seen when I visit Mike Rogers office or at his event — a big guy in a suit. Security. It is normal for politicians. And I don’t mind. The one thing that still makes America great — at least for now — is that at least people with marginal views are allowed to speak. I think that door may be closing some, and it is certainly hard to be heard. But at least for now, unless you are protesting against the President or the Vice President, the big guys in suits don’t actually arrest you. Or haven’t so far anyway.
I smelled that Radio was no good.
Why would Jimbo need some swarmy piece of shit like that for a blog???
BostonJoe was asking legit questions and bringing about information and news… and all of a sudden we have some dickhead in our midst. This is who Jim needs around even in a blog???
NEXT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Sorry Jimbo, you’re flushed.
This is WAR. Sorry.
Only two types of Republicans turned Democrats.
Floaters and Sinkers.
Why would Jimbo need some swarmy piece of shit like that for a blog?
That could have possibly been an attempt to control/stifle dissent. Who needs that? Seems to me that is more of a mind game than what one expects from a candidate.
Something else is bugging me…why give a speech in Washtenaw County? That is not the 8th Distict…Could someone explain that one to me?
You’ve got plenty of time to make up your mind.
KRS-One once said:
I think about those words alot these days.
Parts of the 8th are changing–referring to the area I live in. Seems to me there is an LTE in the local paper (written usually after a liberal/progressive writes in) that complains about the fact that the area is getting too liberal. On a few occasions, the writer of the original LTE has been told to move to A2. And, there was a time when such letters would never have been printed. Also, the Livingston County Press endorsed K/E in ’04.
Would also like to point out that one of the Catholic churches has a Spanish Mass now, as the Hispanic population is increasing. The population of the county is more diverse than it has been. However, the problem is that many people are too cynical due to actions of the repub adminstration to believe that anything will make a real difference.
Long story, but I gave you a short version.
Heard him speak twice. And, those, plus this earlier blogging tonite, more questions are in my mind that need to be answered. (In all honesty, I was expecting answers and clarification of my questions tonite.)
Or as an independent. But, for the love of God, don’t claim to adopt progressive principles and ideas if you aren’t fully committed to them!
It’s hard to be completely honest in a forum where everyone can read. But it would have been nice if there had been only one candidate on display tonight and if the wife of the other candidate had simply been an audience member instead of a participant. It might have made it easier for him to have had a real dialogue. If she’s reading this, I don’t mean to offend her. But it just would have been easier.
Glad I’m not the only one who thought that!
She behaved as though this was a cocktail party and not a blog. And I hate that superior attitude that some people have–makes me crazy. For crying out loud, there are others who are in worse shape–that does not give her the right to look down on them. The blogosphere is really having an influence–appreciate it, as opposed to taking it for granted.
</rant>
I can empathize with your dilemma, BostonJoe. I would love to be able to beat the drum for anyone running against my DINO rep here. If I had a rat’s ass chance in hell to run against Boswell (old, fat, dumb and Blue Dog Dem) I would do it. Alas, I do the usual “hold your nose and vote” dance and keep the seat “memocratic.”
I don’t have a panacea for you, my friend, but I do feel the same conflict, and know what you’re talking about when you voice your concerns. And I know the depression and anger too.
Now that we’ve successfully fomented civil war in Iraq, can it be far behind here? A subject that has been troubling me greatly for the last few years, and especially since the 2004 débacle.
I have had these civil war thoughts, too. I think I started after watching “Hotel Rwanda” during the election year, or just afterward. Hearing the hate talk-radio guys with their “cockaroaches” label for the group to be killed. Sounded a lot like liberals in America to me. I think I am way over dramatic in saying this, but I thought it. And have said it before. The thought is in my mind. Like when I have to watch callers on C-SPAN. The fundie right is absolutely intolerant for “liberals.” To be fair, I am almost equally intolerant for them. But I have no plans to pick up a gun. And I wonder about some of them, and their own access and disposition to use firearms with more intent than our good vice president.
I am really concerned folks with what the dem party keeps asking us to settle for. I admit to being very cynical of the majority of republicans and what they say. Now, we have Jim, who has been a lifelong repblican suddenly switch and was still giving money to repub friends in 2002. I am so cynical that I believe the republican party may be doing this on purpose to assure they hold the voting power. They know that the majority of dem voters will hold their nose just to try and get back the majority. If they can run their candidates as dems it will give us the “illusion” of winning those seats yet when they do win, they will vote with the repubs the majority of the time. Am I paranoid? Am I crazy? In the climate we are living in right now, I would not put anything past them. Is this what we really want? If this is happening there is only one way to stop them, find our own candidates.
If you are paranoid, I am, too. I had the same crazy thought. I didn’t write it. Because I just find it hard to believe that this man is not sincere in his outrage at Bush for outing his friend. But the thought crossed my mind.
Well if he is so outraged about the outing of his friend, why, as an attorney isn’t he out there defending her, working with Fitz to get these guys? Why does he feel that his “revenge” for his friend being outed will best be served by running for office? I guess I just don’t understand why he is running for office. He didn’t answer the questions but with vagueness imho. I want a straight shooter that will speak up for us not this wishy washy crap they we have come to expect. Tell it like it is!
My take. Just reading between the lines of all that is written and said. I’d guess Jim Marcinkowski really wants to be an elected person. He wanted that in college as a young Republican. He wanted it when he ran as a Republican in ’92 and ’00. And he wants it now, as he runs in ’06. What his actual philosophies are, I would bet, aren’t really what is at issue for him. That is just my opinion, reading the record.
I still don’t like the fact that one of the speeches was from Washtenaw county. Like I asked earlier, why give a speech out of the district, when one is running for a seat in a different district? This has really been bugging me. I mean, if the man doesn’t even know the boundaries of the district, that tells me something.
Or is that there is another reason. And now I am wondering if it could possibly be that Jim has his eye on running for another office in the future. With that in mind, is it possible that his conversion to the Democratic pary is for another purpose? And I would guess that he is.
Let me take that a step further: Is he just using his background and congressional testimony to make a name for himself so he can possibly challenge someone else? Now I am wondering if he is going to try to take on Carl Levin when Levin runs for re-election.
Think about it–Levin is a fairly reliable Democrat. And he can be a thorn in a repub’s side. Disagree w/some things he’s said/done, but not enough to make me ever say that I wouldn’t vote for him again.
Just wondering…
You are sensible and you are right. And I say this as a person who believes that the window for a political solution has closed.
However, when it was open, and what closed it, was exactly what you describe.
It was the failure of the American voting class to be more like Street Kid, to refuse platitudes and bullshit and crapola about taking what you can get.
Take what you can get means you will get what you are willing to take.
So now what you have gotten are politicians who work for corporations, not for you.
The notion that you can change anything by becoming devotees of candidates who disagree with you on fundamental issues like whether the US should spend a dollar to kill children in foreign countries instead of a dime to take care of American children – and their parents, the question of whether medical treatment is a commercial product or a human right, the question of whether a day’s work, any work by anybody, should be worth, at the very least, the value of a day’s survival – I could go on, but you get the idea.
Which candidate has vowed, for instance, to immediately liberate the kidnap victims in Gitmo and the other torture camps around the world? Which ones have even called for such a thing?
It is neither cynical or crazy to question whether people will prefer being tortured knowing that one party or another has a majority in the congress, or whether people like Street Kid, or those in even worse conditions, will be comforted in their lack of medical treatment knowing that the politicians they voted for believe that health care is something that might happen one day and it looks like that’s the direction things are going.
It is neither cynical nor crazy to realize the reality that Americans are dying because they do not have enough money to purchase medical treatment, and the ones who are not dying are in pain, they have illnesses that will get worse. Americans are being priced out of housing, out of utilities, out of the costs of automobile ownership.
That kind of thinking, that let’s just take it slow and wait and vote for candidates who will put the status quo into more attractive terms for us, so we won’t mind waiting – for women’s ownership of their bodies, for equal protection under the law for gay people, for health care, for a cessation of crimes against humanity in foreign lands that threaten the security of Americans in a squillion different ways, for quality education, for a Living Wage, for a Right to Housing – that kind of thinking has led to the situation your country is in today. It has led to the deaths of many people, and more die as I type this.
It is not time to settle for candidates with good hair and shrewd speechwriters.
It is time, if you will pardon the vulgarity, to excrete or depart the powder room.
If I don’t get a better option, I’m going to place my first write in ballot ever this fall. (Unless I’m bound by a wage with BooMan). And I will write in the name “DuctapeFatwa.” And I will be happy. And if that doesn’t earn me a visitor, I will be surprised.
I think Ductape might be running for senator in PA, too…
as Emperor, I might consider it. Do all the above with executive decrees, and then say to you, like Thomas Jefferson, ma’am, you have a nation, if you can keep it.
And then I would go to lunch.
Emperor Fatwa… 🙂
Can we have uniforms and distinctive hand salutes. For me, the biggest problem with the American Empire is its total lack of attention to fashion and the trappings of Imperialism.
in participant’s choice of orchid, sky blue, or apricot.
And there will be a new anthem. As a gesture of peace and to reach out to the imperialist community, under my rule the US will liberate Canada’s national anthem, because America deserves an anthem people can sing even if they are not Aretha Franklin.
If I could be a minister in your cabinet, and not simply dispatched because I am marginal and dangerous for speaking my mind, I would like to suggest that in future references to appropriations of the Canadian national anthem, that your Excellence consider suggesting that it is not the Canadian people who are the problem. The Republic of Fatwa has, as does the world community, a problem with the Canadian regime’s insistence on hoarding songs which can be sung by the masses of people with normal ranged voices. It is a decision the Canadian government is making. And it has consequences. Or it will have consequences, once the U.N. member nations can be made to understand how their interests in liberating this important song are important to the community of responsible Imperial nations.
Also, I would order my outfit in apricot, respectfully.
for having fashioned such a singable anthem, and it will of course, continue to be their anthem, and the US will simply be empowering them to share it.
And the name will not be the Republic of Fatwa, but the United States of South Canada, to avoid confusion while singing the anthem.
Apricot is an excellent choice. I have entered this data in the Early Bird Apparel spreadsheet.
Pastels really aren’t very good on me…could I please have, say a violet or magenta uniform?
How about a Magenta CodePink bra? 🙂
like Emperor Norton of San Francisco?
I’d be down with that.
” I am so cynical that I believe the republican party may be doing this on purpose to assure they hold the voting power. They know that the majority of dem voters will hold their nose just to try and get back the majority. If they can run their candidates as dems it will give us the “illusion” of winning those seats yet when they do win, they will vote with the repubs the majority of the time. Am I paranoid? Am I crazy? In the climate we are living in right now, I would not put anything past them.”
Nor would I. When I first read Jim’s website a couple weeks ago, I was hopeful that he was a candidate I could support. I was very disappointed in last night’s discussion. I’ll withhold final judgment until, hopefully, he shows up in this area for a meet & greet with ordinary people (i.e. not big donors).
Before this area was gerrymandered into the 8th, it was represented by Dale Kildee of Flint – a Democrat, but an anti-choice one. Still he was better than Mike Rogers. I recently sent an email to Rogers’ office asking him to support impeachment based on Bush’s admission of breaking the law concerning wire-tapping without a warrant. The reply I received yesterday told me that the actions were completely legal because A.G. Gonzales – Mr. Torture is OK himself – approved them. I added it to the growing file of replies from Rogers that espouse views completely opposite of mine.
There is broad bipartisan support on fundamental issues.
I have a growing file of letters from Rogers, too. I particularly like the one where he tells me he opposes torture across the board, right before he votes to oppose the McCain anti-torture amendment. Classic.
I’ve heard Jim Marcinkowski speak in a setting like you have described. He went on and on and on and on with what he wanted to say. Bored the hell out of everyone. Showed absolutely no interest in the concerns of his audience. Took three questions and left. Would also like to point out that all of the questions were on domestic issues. And he always went back to what he wanted to say–the outing of Valerie Plame. Fact of the matter is that he is a one issue candidate–his issues and no one else’s.
Unresolved conflicts simmer below the surface and tend to reappear to do more damage later. We see the same forces, people and ideals that never went away.
Another irony is that fate has placed these people in the public light again and these are the ones who can make a difference, if they choose. The question is whether we are ready to change the way the system operates or if the players will continue to play as though the game doesn’t exist.
It was covered over a long time ago but that only enabled it to get stronger. Plenty of us can see it but there is absolutely nothing we can do about it. This is the result of ignoring a problem in hopes it will go away.
these “new dems” have been in training repubs for 30 years. They drank the Koolaide during the Reagan years and now they are seeing the light? Give me a fucking break. We need think tanks. We need young democrats that are progressives and we need to as DTF said, shit or get off the pot. We really cannot afford to wait another minute. Storm the DNC offices, demand a meeting with the party leaders en masse and tell them what we expect from them and OUR candidates. NOW!
It’s true that we need all of that. The point I was making is that the same people fighting the proxy wars across the globe and covertly manipulating other people for death and profit are the ones who can make the change. I don’t see any sign of that in any of the current candidates.
Let me state it as tactfully as I can.
Until the voters will take an honest look at the 3 decades of a successfull mindfuck that sold mercenaries as an Islamic extremist threat, this is the best type of candidate the voters will get.
same as the old boss.
I for one am not the brightest bulb in this pond. I know that and I’m trying to educate myself… but I’m not stupid either.
I’m fed up with Democrats telling me to settle for less. To be patient.
I was excited to read the posts that Booman and Susan brought to us. And then THANKS TO BOSTONJOE and STREETKID… I read and reread that this was just another same old same old.
I especially didn’t like the CongressWife being patronizing and then turned around and was quite snotty to Streetkid…. we’re just blogging… meaningless… she’s married to a man who is running… I guess that’s more than what me or Streetkid do.
The only want to make a change is to fight for it. Peacefully or not.
BostonJoe, thank you!!!!!!!!!!! Thank you from the bottom of my heart for standing up and not shutting up. You were asking questions that needed to be asked.
No one should ever be told to shut up or pipe down or that they’re just “bloggers”.
Last night made me more mad. More pissed off. We aren’t settling for their shit. We need WARRIORS. Strong leaders who are following the people. It’s going to take guts cause we’re bleeding out here.
Streetkid, my mom last night told me she’s losing her medicaid. She had to pay taxes – she made 10 thousand dollars from my dad’s pension/divorce. She will die without the oxygen tank. Thanks Bush. And I guess she can just wait and be patient… soon…. soon
All those who were harsh, critical, demanding – thank you!!! You give me hope.
Last night made me more mad. More pissed off. We aren’t settling for their shit.
Me, too. Not because there was some challenge to the questions I asked. I welcome that. And not because this is just a guy who is a DINO. He is actually a Republican. No sheep’s clothing. Just a wolf. At least that’s what I gather. It is alternatinly making me grimace and laugh. Seriously.
And stop with the “not the brightest bulb.” You were right there standing up. And your courage makes you a very bright bulb. Goof bulb.
Bsoton Joe we all have our strenghts 🙂 MInde sometimes is self-deprecating humor. 🙂
Walked DanDan to her bus which means I have to take Wesley as he gets very anxious left alone in the house … anyways.
She asked me what I had just typed – I posted before I left. We talked very simply. How I was mad that to me there seemed to be some condenscending tones in the Q&A… er I mean Q&Q. The whole meet the news boss same as the old boss.. Danni likes The Who due me having been in Tommy… anyways
My son said this: I quote my 13 yr old son.
*”Maybe the problem is only politicians to vote for instead of real people.” *
Politics, the business of politics, is not about you.
It is not about “real people” in the sense of real people who are living a few checks or less from the street, people who are living one illness or injury from the street, people who are living one more invasion away from some very unpleasant consequences.
Real people have, over the years, ceded their country, its governance, and their well being to corporations.
The choice is to take it back, by whatever means necessary, or sit quietly and meekly accept your fate, while a few rich men get richer.
Well, let me exploit Dammit Janet’s progeny to make this point. While politics and politicians may all be alike, I see some hope in democracy movements like those in Eastern Europe and Central and South America. And perhaps even here on the pond. They are concerned with people and ideas, perhaps above personality. Or at least that is what the idealist in me wants to believe. That we could build that, here. And that if we don’t, it is simply because we did not try hard enough.
It’s tough to distinguish between the genuine compassion and further manipulation sometimes.
Out of the mouth’s of Babes come the most honest and clear answers.
Oh God Janet, I’m sorry about your mom losing her Medicaid!!! Does your she also have Medicare? (Wondering about something, that is why I asked.)
Yesterday, I asked a ? re: the fact that Medicare is forbidden by law to negotiate for the best price of rx’s while the VA still can.
Well, I checked to see if any of my ?’s were answered and lo and behold, another one was–makes a total of two!
The answer by Marcincowski is as follows:
And this is a how I ended an earlier diary:
Is Jim trying to learn the art of snark?
If your marginalized letter is the proposal you have on the table, maybe you’d better stop marginalizing yourself, move on over to the left and let people comment on it.
That it is in a perfect place. Will attract about as much attention as it is probably worth.
Ok I’ll comment without it. Why make deals? Why wait for a leader? Why entice someone else to do the leading for you?
Seems to me like you have some pretty good leadership skills yourself. You certainly have an amazing ability to whip up a frenzy with your use of the English language. I question, however, the use to which you are putting these talents during these last few weeks.
Yes, life is depressing. Yes, we keep getting beat on issues that we know we should win. Yes, it would be nice if we lived in a perfect world where we could just wish that there was a party that represented OUR views and took care of OUR needs. You’re not telling us anything that we don’t know.
If you don’t like this man and don’t want him to be the Democratic candidate, then go check out the others and come back and tell us why they are better. If there aren’t others, go recruit them. Or sign yourself up to run.
Too many progressives like to complain about how bad things are and yet they never seem to get around to working real change in the world because there are too “oh buts”. Oh, but he makes me feel dirty. Oh, but all politicians are alike I can’t stand to be around them. Oh, but he doesn’t represent my values. Oh, but he doesn’t respond to one important issue so I choose to ignore all the issues where there is common ground.
Stop with the excuses. Life is what it is. You can either get into the sty and muck it out, even if it means you have to get filthy while doing it. Or you can sit around complaining about the smell of the pigs.
I’ve got few leadership skills, Maryb. Trust me on this. To the extent I have any influence on anything — you are looking at my one medium.
To the extent anyone likes anything I write, my experience tells me that it is because sometimes what I write touches on some underlying truth.
What I write, even in fictional form, generally comes from my heart. And the fact is, I’ve been involved in a pretty big struggle within myself for the past few weeks. Maybe longer. I think it just boils down to this: Can we work within the system and win (or is the Democratic party the right vehicle)? Or, does their need to be some systematic change (a new party or movement)? I am honestly struggling with that issue. Sometimes writing helps me think these things through, I guess. I don’t mean to subject you to my honest thoughts against your will.
I suspect that the reason these things I’m writing are viewed by some as “good” ideas and some as “complaining” is that because those who are reading have a pretty clear idea about the ideas I’m working through.
I’m also thinking that this is perhaps a revolutionary moment. Not talking about guillotines and blood in the streets. I don’t like those revolutions. I’m talking about a political revolution. I am sensing, in the talks I’ve given, in blogging, etc., that there may be a critical mass of energy, toward a massive change. Could be I am delusional. In fact, if I were a bettor, I would place my money on that possibility. But I think there is an outside chance that I’m on to something. That others are feeling it too. And that this place in time (right here — the frog pond) has the potential to do wild things.
Why ask for a leader? Just seems to me as the way forward. I think BooMan is uniquely placed to lead a crazy blogging revolution. (Sounds insane, huh). But honest. Simple as that. If I thought I could do it myself, I would. I don’t think that. So I won’t. It also serves as a check on my own temptation toward irresponsibility. If I’m too extreme in these calls, from the community here at BooMan, as you might suggest, then this sets me back on course, I guess. I mean if there can’t be a spark for a political revolution here, then I doubt it is possible anywhere.
As for Jim Marcinkowski. Yeah. I can’t vote for him. Does that mean my options are a) shut up or b) run or c) get more involved. No. I don’t think those are my options. I think I can talk to people. The people I know. There may be a primary challenger who is more palatable. There may be a third-party candidate who is more worthy of progressive votes. And I’ll be sure to let folks here know, if I identify such options.
I’m sensitive between balancing complaining with actions. I think I have been active in my way. But I don’t think I’m quite ready to stop complaining.
I mean, in this instance, this guy is just a flat out Republican. I’m sorry I found that out when I did, and shared it as I did, if that offends you in some way. But it is so bad as to be laughable, and shutting up is just not an option I chose.
So there you have it. My defense of my exercise of speech here.
Leadership comes in many forms. One primary way is by influencing thought, and you admit that you influence thought through your writing. You say that writing helps you work out your personal beliefs and that rings true for me. But I don’t for a minute believe that you don’t enjoy the influence that it gives you to write this out in public. If you didn’t enjoy the attention you’d buy a journal.
I think there is a natural tendency for writers who write for a public audience to want that audience to show up. I’m sure that nothing could be worse than pouring your heart into something meant for public consumption that no one reads. Far better that everyone who reads it disagrees with you. I bet there are many things you could choose to write about that come from your heart but that no one would want to read. I can’t blame you for choosing those topics that will get you an audience.
My problem here is that I suspect that part of the reason you posted this when you did, so soon after the candidate meeting/forum last night was because you read the audience last night and saw that a posting like this would give you an automatic ally sympathetic audience. Maybe I’m wrong and if so I apologize for any offense I’m giving you. But I feel strongly that simply providing a forum for frustrated people to further vent their very real frustrations about the very real problems in their life is not the highest and best use of your time or talents.
That being said, the issue that you frame is a good one and is topical. I’m glad you are considering exploring it because it needs to be explored. And you aren’t inflicting your views on me. Trust me, I don’t read 90% of the diaries that are posted here. I don’t read things I’m not interested in.
Being here, and publishing novel this year, was the first time I’ve ever written for an audience (aside from a few articles).
Love the process. Love to generate discussion. It helps me think. I’m a better writer. Wholly enjoy writing and responding. Don’t know it is always good. But I like it.
As for this diary. Just an honest reaction to meeting Jim M. I was pissed and saddened. And I wrote it. The highest and best use of time. It was for me, when I wrote it. And, honestly, sometimes I regret things I write. But in this case. Not a lick.
That’s what the “establishment” wanted us to do in the late ’60s / early ’70s. Most of the activists I knew then ended up working, one way or another, within “the system.” Some change came about, but most were seduced, strong-armed, or otherwise overcome by the corporatocracy that developed because not enough of us listened to Ralph Nader. He was just another voice at the time, and a lot of people wanted their “stuff” — corporate work clothes, gas-guzzling cars, etc. After McGovern’s defeat, it was over. I’m afraid it’s been too late for a long time, because too many “owe our soul to the company store,” as Tennessee Ernie used to sing.
If there is any hope, “the system,” as it currently exists, has to change. Look: Last election, we had to choose between two members of a powerful, elite, secret society. Kerry wouldn’t even insist on an honest vote count — because he owes his soul to Skull & Bones?? WTF is that?? Not the democracy I used to live in.
Which, I suppose, is all just to say, “Thanks, Joe, for recognizing the unacceptable and speaking up.”
I apprectiate the historic perspective you bring to the table. I missed out on that time. Was a young child, and my parents were not anywhere near any movement, other than the movement toward owning a home, perhaps. So I feel many of the things I might say are probably not as well informed as they could be.
Gore, Kerry. Listening to BooMan on the radio today. Voter fraud. Ohio. Florida. Being mocked about Democracy by Vladimir Putin. Not all that enviable, this two party system. Thoughts like these make me feel I am sane, and the world is mad.
I’m sure of it. Lots of democracies have more than two parties, and they form alliances among themselves to meet their ends. Lots of democracies have single-payer health care, too!
Our country doesn’t have to be run like this. It’s been so beaten into us, since the MBAs began to multiply, that we’ve got to “run it like a business,” people can’t seem to see that that’s a lie.
Our government is supposed to provide common defense, general welfare, and maintain liberty, right? Since it’s not doing any of those things — and hasn’t been for quite some time — something has to change. Unfortunately, most of the Dems don’t seem to get it.
Perhaps the world is mad — but I think it’s more likely the governments than the people. “Golbalism” really means “international conglomerates,” and they seem to be the rulers now. By definition, of course, a corporation exists to make a profit and has no other guiding values.
What to do? Just wish I had the answer. But I know you’re absolutely right in standing up to phony “Dems.”
All the best.
I think that the one thing that is being overlooked is that we are again expected to “settle” for a DINO. And the fact of the matter is that there are already too many. Another thing to consider is the opinion of those who live in MI 8th. I mean, we are the ones who will be represented. And, with that in mind, I feel that our opinions should count for more than others.
It is easy for a person who lives in another district to climb on the bandwagon and say, yeah, give Jim a chance, he’s now a Democrat, let see what happens. And that is a bunch of crap. Supporting a non-responsive candidate when we already have Rogers? That makes no sense, as it appears to me that those who are suggesting that do not live here and haven’t had to put up w/the crap from Rogers.
And some have said that is one more vote toward impeachment–unless I missed it last nite, Jim did not answer yes when asked whether or not he would vote to impeach gwb. So, there is no reason to support him.
Someone else is needed.
We’ll be fighting in the streets
With our children at our feet
And the morals that they worship will be gone
And the men who spurred us on
Sit in judgement of all wrong
They decide and the shotgun sings the song
I’ll tip my hat to the new constitution
Take a bow for the new revolution
Smile and grin at the change all around
Pick up my guitar and play
Just like yesterday
Then I’ll get on my knees and pray
We don’t get fooled again
The change, it had to come
We knew it all along
We were liberated from the fold, that’s all
And the world looks just the same
And history ain’t changed
‘Cause the banners, they are flown in the next war
I’ll tip my hat to the new constitution
Take a bow for the new revolution
Smile and grin at the change all around
Pick up my guitar and play
Just like yesterday
Then I’ll get on my knees and pray
We don’t get fooled again
No, no!
I’ll move myself and my family aside
If we happen to be left half alive
I’ll get all my papers and smile at the sky
Though I know that the hypnotized never lie
Do ya?
There’s nothing in the streets
Looks any different to me
And the slogans are replaced, by-the-bye
And the parting on the left
Are now parting on the right
And the beards have all grown longer overnight
Jimbo can take his “I’m a Democrat, trust me” BS and go away.
And that goes for his little “dog”, too.
He freaking needed a Guard Blog ROFLMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
*American women, children and working middle class families”. Uninusred – it’s like the Insurgent term. Depersonalize it so you can crap on em more.
Politicians aren’t our answer.
You’re right. And Jim’s background shows that he is nothing more than another politician who will say what he thinks people want to hear. For crying out loud, the second time that I heard him speak, he was handing out copies of his resume.
He has been a part of this fucked up system his whole life and expects to be welcomed w/open arms because of a sudden conversion to the democratic party.
We need to look outside of the system to find a true progressive leader. That is it, straight and to the point.
Hey Joe, very late to this shindig going on here. I have to say my thoughts mirror yours completely.
I had this long written out post but deleted it so for the sake of brevity I’ll just state what I think simply.
The Democratic Party is broken and has fissures you can drive a Boeing 747 through..meaning all the Dems have sold out on too many issues to recount here-we all know what they are. It doesn’t matter what they say, it matters what they DO. And they aren’t doing much of anything.
There is no longer a unified core platform of principals and beliefs that is driving the Democrat Party…that ALL dems will get behind. There is no cohesion or unity..just singular dems doing their own thing…whether it benefits the people of this country or not.
I have spent my entire life as a democrat and would never, ever have believed I would see the day where I would come to the belief that the Party’s platform and ideals has lost it’s way-given over to expediency and people like Zell Miller or Lieberman who call themselves democrats or any of the other democrats who aren’t true democrats anymore.
A new progressive party should rise up from the ashes like the mythical Phoenix with an ironclad platform of certain issues and ideals that are not subject to change or letting one slide to win a race this time, etc etc. If you belong to this party this is what you stand for and fight for period.
I realize starting a new party is probably an impossible dream but what are dreams for eh Joe?
I don’t know CI. Proabably what Maryb says above is right. All our (my) written gymnastics are just wasted effort. Just don’t know.
I do know that I’ve deleted a couple of long posts in a couple of diaries today. So I must be fairly agitated, because I don’t normally self censor.
If there is going to be another movement/party, I suppose there will be one, no matter what we do. That history will act without any conscious effort, perhaps.
I get the feeling you studied at the Bush41 school of political uprising.
😀
Yeah. Only less decisive. 🙂
I used to be the kid that would take the stick and poke the hornet nest at others’ urging. After a good poke, I turned around and the engineers of the plan were nowhere in sight. Those pissed off hornets had only one target to choose…
ah,…good times, good times.
Where did I say your written gymnastics are wasted effort? I was trying to say that you are a powerful writer and you should use that power wisely.
And there is a difference between self-censoring and self-editing. Censoring means you never say something. Editing means you don’t say it until you have it right. I hope you are not self-censoring. I hope you ARE self editing.
Did not mean to mischaracterize what you said. Just mulling it.
Glad to see you here, chocolate ink. You have jsut explained why a 3rd party is needed. The current crop of dems are useless. And, someone else posted it somewhere and I can’t remember who it was, but now there are three of us, four counting Joe, who really feel the same way. LEt the democratic party die–it is not democratic.
and that “eat me” feeling is creeping in, there’s always the other last-ditch option: jump up and rip their throats out. Might as well take some with you.
DaveW. Extent of my paranoia. I don’t even feel comfortable using figurative language like “rip throats out” when I’m calm enough to catch my writing, because I think that these statements could be used by those who don’t like dissent. If I’ve learned anything about myself in last months, it is at least that I am nonviolent about the change I seek. I don’t think violence solves anything. Not saying I don’t agree with your sentiments here, either, in figurative way. Or trying to chastise you. Just things that are on my mind in the security state. Figuratively, I think we need some some end like that to the system. Practically, I’m not so sure BooMan isn’t right. Ultimately, I suppose what cotterperson just said above is probably right — ship is sailed — it is all for naught.
Joe,
you know as well as I do that when you begin to censor yourself, whether your speech is figurative or not then they have won. They’ve fucking won buddy.
I’d never presume to tell you what to do. I’m a Father too and I fear for my children like you but I will never allow my freedom to speak my mind or think revolutionary thoughts, violent or not, to be censored.
At a time like this we need more voices of truth and yes, anger. Not less.
Peace to you and yours Joe
Truth and anger. You are right, supersoling. More is needed. And, unfortunately there is not enough. People are being conditioned to settle and not ask questions. I have trouble with that.
I looked at the guys bio and I am thinking WTF??? He wants to be a dem now??? WHY?? Just so he can get through the primary probably. There are some reps in KS going dem for that reason alone!
And why then should we trust the sucker?
If he is elected he may vote badly. But his registration will give Dems leadership seats and committee chairs. Think of yourself as voting for House Majority Leader Nancy Pelosi.
Sure he’ll suck. But will he be so loud about it? ;->
Then if you see her as Majority Leader, know you helped make it happen. The Rethugs did not go all insane morality party in one year. Read “The Reputlican War Against Women”
ttp://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0553100149
It took time, and power…
You are assuming that he would support Pelosi!
BJ,while I resonate to your desire for a candidate that is as true blue progressive as are most of us here, I am concerned about a couple of things:
1. Are you denying the possibility of change?
Are there no persons who have changed in political viewpoint as a result of some final “straw breaking the camel’s back”? No sudden moments of illumination? No realization that one has to listen to the doubts that have been growing inside you?
Yet some seem to deny Mr. Marcinkowski any such change. It is as if he were not a bred-in-the-bone Democrat, if not a Progressive, he is not a Democrat, or a liar, possibly even a deliberate plant of the Republican party.
I am troubled by this, because if this is true, we had better not be wasting our time trying to muster a majority. Better to devote thought and action to ways for a minority to take control.
2. I do not understand why you are unwilling to talk to this candidate further.
BJ, you enjoy writing to people and getting their reaction, or so I think. You seen very open to feedback about your ideas, so I am surprised – and yes, disappointed – that you shut the door, mind made up, no talking, no listening, no persuasion, will not vote for Marcinkowski. Kind of reminds me what of what I hear many people say about Red-staters, BJ – mind closed. Yet you have gone with great patience to the anti-war group in Lansing, getting them engaged to action. I don’t understand this quick rush to judgment on your part. I expected you to want to meet this guy face-to-face. Ask your questions. Express your grave reservations about Nicaragua. Pin him to the wall about putting more issues up on his campaign site and in his talks and materials – beyond the very short time limits of his experience here. But that doesn’t seem to be what you want to do. So I go back to #1, and my last thoughts about #1.
Is change possible? If so, what’s the standard for change? What makes a real change as opposed to one that isn’t a real change? Leftward steps allowed only if you begin left of some line set in stone somewhere? Or is it time? Must the leftward step begin at an early age? If college is too late, high school? Junior high? Preschool? Is it always the case that one’s opponents at one stage of life are one’s opponents forever?
I am extremely hesitant to raise these points at all, and I realize these concerns are not political points as much as developmental ones. However, I am a developmentalist who believes strongly in the reality of change. If change is not possible, I am really still just a Goldwaterite, same as that little girl who helped her dad pass out campaign literature for AUH20 in 1964.
I’m a former far right Republican myself, so I understand it can happen. I also understand that for a politician to change ideologies is a much bigger deal than it is for you or me. We don’t have to start all over forming new connections and fundraising arrangements.
My skepticism, and I gather BostonJoe’s skepticism as well, stem from the fact that there really isn’t very much evidence of change. At best, Marcinkowski sounds like a pre-Reagan Republican who stayed where he was as the rest of the party lurched further and further right.
That’s better than being a contemporary far-right radical Republican, but the Republicans of the 60’s and 70’s only look good in comparison to what we have now. They were pretty awful at the time.
There is a real danger in backing marginal Democrats just to win an election, and that is that the general public — not us political junkies — develops the entirely justified impression that there isn’t much difference between the parties.
Thanks for your response, eodell. I agree that BJ doesn’t want a Democratic candidate just for the sake of having a Dem running against Rogers. However, I don’t think we have enough information to classify Marcinkowski as currently a pre-Reaganite whose party has lurched to the right while he remained unchanged. Certainly the Repubs have lurched to the right. But I did not hear strong right-wing stuff from him. I still think that if he is a marginal Democrat, we should be working on him to become less marginal. Move him more to the left.
He did talk about single payer health insurance, about serious concerns for globalization in the industrial sector, about leaving abortion to women and their medical providers. He did not use the language that we use, but that does not necessarily make him a DINO. Nor does it make him someone who is running simply to get elected. Frankly, it will be hard for anyone to run successfully against Rogers.
He was peppered with questions without much time to answer, and frankly it was hard to always know who was him and some, including me, were initially confused about the other congressional candidate – and especially that person’s wife (!) who kept commenting. I think that candidates conservatism left an impression of greater affinity for Repub positions that I heard from Marcinkowski.
Now, I’m not trying to defend Marcinkowski. I’d just like to see more about his positions, and to try to persuade rather than be so certain that one brief set of comments shows us all we need to know. That’s all.
I was a good bit shocked by his resume. I could have been hasty. But I don’t think so. I’ve made up my mind. Personally. You make up your own. Please disregard my comments for that purpose.
Can people change? Yes. I’ve changed. It is just my personal judgment that with this change, I’ve got no way of knowing if it is something sincere, or if it is purely political. And I will have no way of knowing, except for the candidates speeches. And I’ve set a standard for myself and candidates/politicians. Show me with deeds not words. Looking at his deeds, I can’t vote for him. Purely personal. Might I change my calculus later, and break down and vote for him when the chips are down and we have a chance to knock off Rogers. I wouldn’t rule anything out. Is he a candidate that I’m going to work for or give money to? You would have to be kidding me. I feel like I will be choosing between two Republicans. Plain and simple. He could talk and give speeches for weeks, but that isn’t going to change his life or record.
So that’s where I stand. Not that it matters all that much.
We both agree and are looking for who would best represent our interests. And it isn’t Marcinkowski. Plain and simple.
He did talk about single payer health insurance.
He was asked about single payer health insurance, and stated that it was “scary”. He did not go into specifics about it. Despite all that has been in the news re: Medicare D, he refused to answer ?’s about that.
leaving abortion to women and their medical providers
That was a question that he was repeatedly asked and refused to answer.
And, silence does tell a person a lot.
Actually, what I wrote, The right-to-die and abortion need less government intervention and more medical-patient control. was a direct quote from Marcinkowski during the session.
Since the live session, however, he has expanded on that a bit – not necessarily to my liking:
I do not agree with either far end of the debate on abortion. My opponent supports legislation that would outlaw all abortions for any reason, even in cases of rape, incest, or if the mother’s life is at risk. I do not support turning women who are confronting an unplanned pregnancy into criminals. The fact is, based on most recent legal decisions it is very clear that abortions will never be totally outlawed in this country. On the other end of the spectrum for example, there has been debate about whether a parent should be informed about a minor seeking an abortion. As the father of a teenage daughter, I would want to be involved in that decision. There are of course exceptions throughout this entire debate, eg. a sexually abusive parent, etc., that should not be used to label or categorize people as being on one side or the other.
His comment about single payer insurance was not that he found it scary, but that the middle class found it scary – and I think he is correct in this. He also went on in that same discussion to say that when the middle class, (who are the biggest voting block in the country – me here), realize the downside to the present system, the way we are already paying for much of a national health care system, they will realize we are a goodly part of the way now, and that there will be significant cost savings to having a gov. run system. I did not read that as his being against a national health care system.
This is my last comment on this thread. Just responding to slew of your posts.
Why Washtenaw speech? I don’t know if any of Washtenaw falls in district. I can’t recall from district map I saw, if some of Northern Washtenaw might fall in. But the other possible answer of why a Dem goes to neighboring Ann Arbor. Fundraising.
Why did I try to make bet with BooMan? We’ll try your way (Dems) until ’06 and if we lose we’ll try our way (3rd party) afterward. I’m basically already at 3rd party place in my mind. Was trying to entice BooMan along. Not likely. But I was trying.
Not faulting you Joe, apologize if it came across that way.
He defintiely did not say he strongly supported/advocated a single payer plan either.
Without getting into the debate regarding the merits of the candidates, a little background info on the district seems to be in order. In 2000, Mike Rogers of Brighton, MI and Dianne Byrum of Leslie, MI competed for the House seat vacated by Debbie Stabenow when she decided to run for her current Senate seat. The results of that election were among the closest in Michigan’s Congressional electoral history, with Rogers beating Byrum with 145,190 votes to Byrum’s 145,079 votes. The Libertarian candidate got 2,467 votes, the Natural Law Party candidate got 715 votes, and the US Taxpayers Party candidate got 691 votes.
In 2002, Rogers ran for reelection against Democratic challenger Frank McAlpine. Rogers won with 156,525 votes to McAlpine’s 70,920 votes. The only other party to participate in the district’s Congressional election was the Libertarian Party, which managed to get 3,152 votes.
In 2004, Rogers faced Democratic challenger Bob Alexander, a fellow peace activist that BostonJoe and I have both worked with. Rogers won with 207,925 votes to Bob’s 125,619 votes. The Libertarian candidate received 3,591 votes, and the US Taxpayers Party candidate got 3,288 votes.
According to my analysis, the best way to unseat Rogers would be to fill the ballot in the general election with as many candidates as possible. The closest race in Rogers Congressional career was one in which he was running against four other candidates, so obviously, the more spoiler candidates, the better.