crossposted from unbossed

Yawn! So what else is new? Another Bush agency transformed from one that fulfilled its mission to protect the powerless and to crack down on law-breaking employers into one that completely refuses to do its job. Just another example of our unitary executive - make that uni-tarry executive - at work. Talk about your energy in the executive the ultra conservatives tout! I guess the WHD folks have found a burning bush to tell them what their life's mission is about.

Money and Obama
(Originally published on my personal blog)

On Thursday June 19th (a.k.a. Juneteenth here in Texas), Senator Barack Obama declared his emancipation from the public financing system for US Presidential Elections. The punditocracy thinks this is a funding battle between two political parties and their respective candidates. In my opinion, there is a transition happening to a post-Internet political party. Obama has recognized it and his funding decision embraces it.

Political parties control access to money and political activists. This control, if it can be marshaled for electoral success, results in real power. The iron triangle of parties, media and special interests has worked to reinforce that control. Senator Obama, by exploiting the power of the Internet, has split a large chunk of the money out of any party’s control. He is also using the Internet to attract the activists. In other words, the parties no longer control the entrance to the political process. After Obama, any candidate can raise money and gain supporters without having to be vetted by party insiders who support the status quo.

America, the only land where you can one week tell the country you will not under any circumstances sell, and then the next week, having held out for more money, DO IT!  Who am I kidding this is just corporate economics at its finest!

To the makers of Budweiser I say take down your commercials where to stake the reputation of your brand on heritage, tradition, and family ownership.

Please forgive me as this piece doesn't directly pertain to politics.  

I wrote this essay a few weeks ago about an encounter that made me think about my career path and life as a writer.  After reading numerous beautiful diaries/comments from writers and journalists here on Daily Kos, I was inspired to share.

So here it is, for what it's worth.  Hopefully this will serve as a tribute and reassurance to my fellow aspiring writers, as well as those who may have changed in profession but not in spirit.  

Yes folks, be prepared. BushCo is meeting with 'regulators' today to discuss the insolvency of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. Any idea who will be footing the bill on this?

Book Review: Ginsberg, Benjamin.  The American Lie: Government by the People and Other Political Fables.  Boulder, CO: Paradigm Publishers, 2007.

This, part two in a series, will analyze Benjamin Ginsberg's book The American Lie as a "cynical realist" take on the American political process, suggesting that even though it's marginally useful to be "cynical," we still must be against "bad pragmatism" and in favor of politics for the greater good even when confronted with the corrupt system we have today.

Next: either a history of bad pragmatism, or a diary on the latest bad pragmatist outrage.  There WILL be a Bad Pragmatism pt. 3.

(crossposted at Docudharma)

Wednesday evening if you were in New York City and you were passing the super-glitzy St. Regis Hotel and you felt hungry for dinner if you had a check for $33,100 in your pocket NO problem because Barack Obama had a place for you at his table or at least in the same room and you could feast yourself on a heavy serving  of Obama HYPOCRISY.

All my math is fuzzy.

Why in the world would a Californian environmental preservation, governmental entity, supported by the likes of the Sierra Club, and the Metropolitan Water District, funded by billions of tax dollars, want to destroy the environment?  Maybe that is a stupid question. This 'agency' is powered by people without ANY science background or have mis-matched backgrounds for the job. You ask, how much damage can an ‘environmental agency’ with people filled with ideals but, with no oversight, do?

There are three projects in Southern California of similar focus, supporters, design, two of which have been massive financial failures. Two projects are associated with dams in L.A. All three projects are FOR THE CHILDREN. Two are about water and all were supported by the water agencies and governmental environmental groups. One related project, a colossal reservoir built by one of the agencies, because of corporate ego, may negatively effect S. California’s water supply in this drought emergency. One project is in the planning and public relations stage where disaster can still be averted. All of the projects are museums, one in Hemet, one in Sunland and one in Whittier Narrows.

The lesson - where there is lots of money and no oversight, things go very badly – like Katrina.

Kath25's diary on the rec list, People Power Will Donate $2,300 Instead, Markos (Updated), argues that Markos is setting a bad example by not donating cash to Obama. Markos' failure to donate out of some misguided principal is particularly disappointing because by my reckoning, WE, the users of dailykos.com, have made Markos Moulitsas a millionaire. Anyone can log onto the site that administers his blog advertising and see the rates that advertisers are paying. Then do some math and you'll see what I mean.

Two weeks ago, I posted a diary on DailyKos, MyDD, Open Left, and the Swing State Project announcing the creation of the ActBlue page Protecting Our Asses.  The goals of this page are as follows:

1. To reinforce vulnerable and potentially vulnerable incumbent members of Congress with cash.

2. To reward good, progressive behavior from these incumbents.

3. To diminish or replace the need for these incumbents to seek fundraising dollars from less progressive sources such as corporate PACs and "moderate"/conservative groups.

4. To send the message that the Netroots will have your back if you have ours.

More over the flip.

Sometimes it's funny as hell, and sometimes it's not. Life, I mean. Life with serious illnesses and big families, and old friends who are every bit as flawed as they are cherished.

I've been lurking at DKosw without cease since my earlier cancer diaries, though I have not often had the stamina to write. But I wrote an email letter to some good friends, lately, and when I got the impusle to share the letter with you, I found myself explaining its context, which grew into a diary.  Besides, I think it's worth letting people like nyceve know that her healthcare and insurance diaries hit me right where I live, and they mean much to me; it's worth letting you know that your Top Comments keep me sane, that the Billary/'Bama pie fights were not always tedious, and that the recent MeteorBlades retrospective was just awesome.  How'my doin?  Jump.

Response to Kos and the ubiquitous "waaaaaannnhh-waaaannnhhhh, Obama is not doing what I want" attitude.

I've had my share of complaints about Obama (okay, more than my share) but I think electing him is one of the most important thing progressives can do. I also think he'll beat McCain by out-organizing and out-planning him. Which is to say that money, always the mother's milk of politics, is especially important. I'm excited by his 50-state strategy and will do what I can to make sure he has the funds to maintain it.

Today and probably for the rest of his life, I will envy Bill Gates.  Do I envy his cunning?  No - like all dilettantes with no real record of accomplishment, I'm certain my cleverness more than matches the best.  Do I envy his wealth?  Not exactly - beyond the ability to go anywhere and never have to work another day in one's life in order to live in luxury (somewhere around $5 million), money is just an abstraction.  Do I envy his technical achievements?  LOL!  Let me know when he has any.  What I envy is that he gets to give away fifty billion dollars, the largest philanthropic endeavor in the history of the word, and all I can do is fantasize about how I would give it away if it were mine.  What would you do with a foundation that big?  Hell, what would you do with a foundation twice or four times that size?  

I was reading Chris Bowers' excellent diary on the FISA vote and I kept thinking about what do politicians actually want from the lefty netroots. I read these blogs a lot more than I write, but there's something about this question that keeps coming back to me. Why would Obama at the very moment of his greatest victory roll over on the FISA bill like his very political future depended on him knocking another hole in the 4th Amendment.  It's a terrible bill and it didn't take a ton a political courage to vote against the damned thing.

I don't believe for a minute there's a politician in America who really is swayed by what we write here.  They come to us, hat in hand and the other hand is held out for our money.  Politicians have learned one thing since the days of the the Dean run for the White House--There's Gold in Them There Netroots.

I've already written in one comment that I'm very disenchanted right now.  Somehow, we're still in Iraq, don't have universal healthcare, don't have stem cell funding.  We're seeing pushes for offshore drilling.  And this week, our party assumed the position when it comes to FISA.

What was even more infuriating is to see candidates that many candidates heavily supported the grassroots and the Netroots (both in the more limited sense that includes the page DailyKos, Swing State Project, etc collaborate on. and the broader sense to include all of the liberal websites such as Democracy for America and MoveON).  It's both heartbreaking and infuriating to see people like Patrick Murphy, Kirsten Gillibrand, Nancy Boyda, Jim Webb, and Jerry McNerney, people we thought would be the vanguard of the coming progressive era, vote they way they do, with the likes of Murphy and Gillibrand joining the Blue Dogs!

No shock here, but it turns out that the Congresspeople most likely to have voted for telecom immunity were those who got the most dough from the telecoms. On average, the representatives who supported immunity got twice as much money from telecom PACs as did those who did not support immunity.

I saw the headline at TPM, which linked to a story in The Hill, which links to the original report at maplight.org (a policy organization/data group based in Berkeley, that uses data to show how money affects politics).

More after the jump...