|
Written by Adrock
|
|
Wednesday, 20 January 2010 09:21 |
|
If you happened to be watching the end of The Biggest Loser on NBC last night, you would have been interrupted by an even bigger loser - Martha Coakley, Attorney General of Massachusetts. She had to concede a loss to Scott Brown for the empty Senate seat left by the late Edward "Ted" Kennedy.
The writing was on the wall weeks ago for this one. Much of the analysis from the Left has been that Coakley just ran a bad campaign and was a bad candidiate. But the Right is trying to turn this into a referendum on Obama; no surprise there. Look, Coakley was a moderate Democrat with little to no legislative experience as Attorney General and a country District Attorney before that. She had a voice that sounded more upper midwest than South Boston. She was quoted as saying she didn't need to "stand outside of Fenway park" to get votes and in an ad, her campaign misspelled the very state in which she was running. She even called legendary Boston Red Sox pitcher Curt "Bloody Sock" Shilling a Yankee fan for Christ's sake! The "perfect storm" culminated with a disinterested electorate which had previously gone for Obama by 61% in the 2008 election, and also 3-4 inches of wet, slushy snow that basically made people who didn't care stay home. She must have known her chances weren't good when most people's first response to who they were going to vote for started with "I don't really like her but..."
However, I think there are actually even bigger losers out there than Coakley herself; the people of Massachusetts. Look, I was born and raised in that state and I know enough about local politics to know its not as liberal as most of the rest of the country thinks. But this election wasn't decided on "the issues" no matter how much someone tells you it was. Scott Brown truly is a "regular guy" who drives a pickup and has a family. But that's no excuse for the fact that he is a full fledged conservative Republican who will stop at nothing to block Obama's forward looking agenda. I heard on a radio show last night that voters don't want to be told they are stupid, that they don't want to be lectured to. Well, when you elect a jackass who goes against everything you previously thought right, you should be lectured. You don't get to vote for change when change is happening right now. You can not vote for independence when that guy is nothing but a tool of the Republican obstruction machine. And you don't get to stay home for this one. As a said before, a vote for Coakley wasn't a vote for her, it was a vote for the forward looking progressive policies and a vote away from the disasterous, failed policies of the late 20th Century and early 21st Century conservatives. Finally, you don't get to destroy the legacy of one of the greatest senators who ever served and then claim you were doing it all in the name of independence.
And that's why the Biggest Loser is actually the millions of people both home and abroad who will continue to be forced to listen to the Party of No. The citizens who have to give credence to people who can't seem to think about anything but themselves. The people who think because they have health insurance through their employer, thats good enough for everyone. The same people who think that tax breaks for the rich will somehow once again prove that trickle-down economics isn't the sham it truly is. We are all losers now.
p.s. There is a glimmer of hope on the horizon. Its that this could make the Democratic leadership wake up and realize that they don't actually need 60 votes to pass legislation. It just takes a little leadership and courage to do what the majority of Americans want to do and go in a direction we've already decided a year ago. However, quotes like this from party leaders do not inspire hope, indeed.
UPDATE: Figured I'd add some perspective to this. Some good reads:
Ezra Klein on why Obama needs to move away from Clinton era tactics.
Matthew Yglesias injects some realistic analysis.
Mark Schmitt on how the 60 vote threshold was an illusion.
And finally a quote from Ted Kennedy that's making the rounds this morning:
"If the Democrats run for cover, if we become pale carbon copies of the opposition, we will lose -- and deserve to lose. The last thing this country needs is two Republican parties."
|
|
Last Updated ( Wednesday, 20 January 2010 12:08 )
|
|
|
Written by Adrock
|
|
Monday, 18 January 2010 13:30 |
|
"The liberal agenda" is a phrase often used by conversations to scare the pants off their own supporters. And they're right! They should be scared. The liberal agenda was voted on in November of 2008 and won squarely. I'm not one to claim a mandate on political agendas, nor even willing to claim the majority gets to overun a country, but the clear, resounding result, was the vote for change and a vote for progressive policy and ideals that say to your neighbor, "where are you hurting?" and "what can I do for you today? You can argue whether that change has come about yet, but you cannot argue that is exactly what happened in the last election cycle.
Fast forward to 2010 and there is a heated battle for the Senate seat left by the late Ted Kennedy. The only reason this is even a close race is because the state Democrats put forth a seriously questionable candidate in Martha Coakley. No matter, I say. The alternate is Scott Brown, a self-proclaimed independent who is anything but. Scott Brown should lose for the following two reasons:
- He can't claim a campaign of change when the "other" party just won on the same idea, resoundingly, and Brown's ideals are exactly opposite of that change.
- His whole campaign platform boils down to one word, two characters; "NO." He has stated that he will, for all intents and purposes, fight tooth and nail and vote against everything the Democrats want.
If there are any liberals out there who are upset with the current leadership in D.C., I can tell you for sure that I feel your pain. The current health care bill is far too moderate in how it does what it attempts to do. Having President Obama publically proclaim "bipartisanship" a key point in negotiations over legislation when the other party refuses to negotiate is a sore spot for me as well.
However, a vote for Martha Coakley isn't a vote for yourself, or even for the citizens of Massachusetts. Its a vote for liberal and progressive ideals that America has been striving and moving toward all our lives. Racial tensions may not have disappeared, and people may die for lack of adequate healthcare, but on balance we are becoming a better society than we were 20, 50 or even 200 years ago.
I ask you to accept the imperfect candiate and look foward beyond your own interests. Its challenging to consider the delicate balance between "how does this help others" versus "what is in it for me," but it is high time we move toward the former and away from the latter.
Please vote for Martha Coakley on Jan 19th.
|
|
Last Updated ( Monday, 18 January 2010 13:57 )
|
|
Martha Coakey for US Senate |
|
|
|
|
Written by Andy Woitkoski
|
|
Thursday, 14 January 2010 21:09 |
|
Today, the Boston Globe officially endorsed Democratic candidate, Martha Coakley, for US Senate. The special election, to be held January 19, will fill the seat of the late Edward Kennedy. The Globe does a wonderful job of making the case for Coakley.
www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/editorials/articles/2010/01/14/coakley_for_senate/
|
|
Republicans Hate Education And The Olympics |
|
|
|
|
Written by Andy Woitkoski
|
|
Wednesday, 30 September 2009 09:48 |
|
First the ever-wise right wing criticized President Obama for his speech to America's school children on the importance of staying in school. They said it was an attempt to "indoctrinate" children with his politics. Maybe they were right to do so. Few issues are as partisan as young children getting an education and its certainly not the President's place to encourage our nation's youngsters to maximize their potential. And I'm sure countless presidential elections have been swung based on the 6-10 year old voting block.
Now the GOP is on the President's case regarding his trip to Copenhagen to lobby the IOC on behalf of his home city, Chicago. The RNC Chairman, Michael Steele, said it was a distraction to the more pressing business at hand, such as Afghanistan and health care. Irony over the latter notwithstanding, it just shows how clueless and desparate the GOP is at this time.
Look folks, just because our last President was a complete moron doesn't mean this one can only handle one thing at a time. I'm pretty sure he didn't sleep the entire flight overseas and was dealing with our nation's business. And to borrow a phrase from SNL's Seth Meyers...really, Michael Steele? Really? You really want to criticize the President for trying to help the nation's third largest city get the Olympics? Would you rather those jobs and economic boost go to Rio? Madrid? I wonder how Michael Steele would feel about the President lobbying the IOC if it was Baltimore who was up for consideration?
We can all expect Republicans to continue to torpedo meaningful health care reform but can't we all agree that it would be great for Chicago to host the Olympics? Apparently not in 2009, when cutting off the nose to spite the face is the GOP's only play in the playbook.
|
|
Last Updated ( Friday, 13 November 2009 18:30 )
|
|
Farewell To The Liberal Lion Of The Senate |
|
|
|
|
Written by Andy Woitkoski
|
|
Wednesday, 26 August 2009 17:32 |
|
Ted Kennedy is going to be eulogized in a lot of places today and by writers a lot better than me. But I would be remiss if I did not use this space to say goodbye to one of the most influential lawmakers in United States history.
His legislative record is legendary and quite possibly beyond compare. And not the cheap stuff either. We're talking civil rights, voting rights, poverty, education, health care- the kind of legislation that has a profound effect on our society. His passion for the causes for which he fought was matched only by his ability to make friends and cut deals with those who called themselves his political enemies inside the chamber and his friends outside it. Ted Kennedy was a bastion of liberalism, but he also knew full well that nothing can be done in the US Senate without a willingness to take into account the other side's fundamental beliefs. That is why you see his name on over 2500 pieces of legislation.
Ted Kennedy's life was also filled with more personal tragedy than one should ever have to endure. He lost all three of his brothers, one of his sisters, two of his sons were stricken with cancer, and of course there was more death. His nephew among others. After his brothers' assassinations the weight of a family empire fell to him when he was only 36 years old and still in his first full term as Senator.
The pressure to fulfill the promise of John and Bobby; to have their presidential destiny thrust upon him had to torture Ted. For he was never an ideal Presidential candidate. Yet the Kennedy name and the legacies of his brothers hounded him until at last he gave it a shot in 1980. And though he had accomplished so much up to that point I believe it was after running in '80 that he became more comfortable as Senator. The United States and Massachusetts were better off for it.
Of course, the man had his flaws too. Who among us does not? Were his magnified because of his stature? Possibly, but they cannot be overlooked. He relentlessly drank and womanized as a young man. The Chappaquiddick incident is a stain on his legacy that will never be removed, and well it should not be. But he overcame these flaws by the sheer force of his personality and by the intense passion with which he went about his job. The causes for which he fought never had a more determined advocate. The downtrodden and working class never had a better friend. And the Commonwealth of Massachusetts never had a more beloved public servant, which is why we sent him back to Washington every sixth year since 1964.
Being only 30 years old., I was not here to witness much of Senator Kennedy's historic career. That said, the time I did have to watch and listen to this extraordinary Senator was more than enough to make him one of my political heroes. He stood for every political ideal that I hold dear.
As a resident of Berkshire County in western Massachusetts I will never forget how Senator Kennedy always made time for our oft-forgotten part of the state. Being two-plus hours west of Boston and having a small share of the state's population have never afforded the Berkshires much attention from the state house. But Senator Kennedy's visits would always serve as a reminder that he never overlooked any part of his state or any group that needed his attention and energy.
Edward Moore "Ted" Kennedy's senatorial accomplishments are historic, his personality legendary. While our country is a lesser place today because of his death, it is also infinitely better because of his life.
My deepest sympathy to the Kennedy family. Ted will be sorely missed.
|
|
Last Updated ( Tuesday, 24 November 2009 13:34 )
|
|
Written by Adrock
|
|
Monday, 13 April 2009 08:26 |
|
I don't generally like to resort to finger pointer for hypocrisy...that is, unless its this blatant:
"[I am not] an anti-gay or anti-gay marriage activist. During the whole Proposition 8 thing, I never once went to a meeting, never once issued a statement, never -- never once even gave an endorsement in the two years Prop 8 was going." - Rick Warren, April 6 interview on CNN's Larry King Live talk show.
"Now let me say this really clearly: we support Proposition 8 -- and if you believe what the Bible says about marriage, you need to support Proposition 8. I never support a candidate, but on moral issues I come out very clear." - Rick Warren, Comments made to his congregation two weeks before the vote on Prop. 8.
If what you are doing is truly God's work, then shout it from the mountain tops. Better yet, come down off that mountain and talk to people face to face. Because the only thing worse than bigots are dishonest bigots.
|
|
Last Updated ( Monday, 13 April 2009 08:34 )
|
|
Written by Adrock
|
|
Tuesday, 20 January 2009 08:53 |
|
If you would, let me add to what my colleague and friend Whoj said yesterday. 5 of us started this site with large, and fairly naive, post-college aspirations of changing the world and emerging from the early 21st Century blog craze with something special. It didn't happen (we just weren't that good) and the reelection of our 43rd President added cynicism to our young minds. 6 years later this site has become a hobby for most of us. But the passion for politics still exists deep in our hearts, because we recognize the impact that governments have on people's lives.
I don't think I'd ever say "President Barak Hussein Obama" in my lifetime. There will be great literature written about this period in our lives. I'm certain it won't simply be written about the fact that an African American with a Muslim name became President of the United States. It will also be about the next 4, and hopefully 8, years and the great things we accomplished as a nation. I couldn't be more happier to be a part of it.
|
|
Last Updated ( Tuesday, 20 January 2009 09:17 )
|
|
Written by Andy Woitkoski
|
|
Monday, 19 January 2009 20:00 |
|
Its been a long wait but The Day is almost here.
January 20, 2009 seemed so far away for so long that I don't know if I've properly acknowledged that its only four hours away. But after all of the waiting, the frustration, the blood-boiling rage, its finally over. George W. Bush's historically disasterous presidency is finally over.
I imagine this is how prisoners feel when they are in jail. Because quite frankly, that is how I felt for most of this presidency. Watching as he bungled one thing after another, how he force-fed this nation a far right wing agenda, how he in so many ways disgraced the Office of the President, it was as helpless as I have ever felt. But now that is all over.
Over the past few months, as his approval ratings remained at all-time lows, I sometimes began to feel sorry for President Bush. Then I remember. I remember the ideology. The arrogance. The complete lack of far-sighted thinking that defined this man and his presidency. And that is when I stop feeling sorry for him and start again to feel the joy of knowing that the United States will no longer be subject to such leadership.
Tomorrow it will all be different. Tomorrow we will start anew.
|
|
Last Updated ( Tuesday, 20 January 2009 14:29 )
|
|
The American Whipping Post Industry |
|
|
|
|
Written by Adrock
|
|
Tuesday, 09 December 2008 09:49 |
|
The American Auto Industry is in trouble. They are currently asking the American people, via Congress, for what they term as "bridge loans," and for what others would term as "bailouts," in order to weather the current financial crisis and come out stable and healthy on the back end. What they seem to have become, however, is a public whipping post for both anyone concerned of their own political ambitions and anyone whose goal is union busting.
Congress asked the CEOs of the Big 3 to appear before Congress to outline their plans for this money. They were ridiculed, both understandibly, but also simply as a distraction, for taking private jets and for not having any concrete plans. So they came back, basically on their knees, driving their fuel efficient cars from their current lineup and presented more detailed plans. Click here for a good roundup of their individual plans.
American manufacturers are indeed in trouble. They don't have enough cash on hand to pay out current liabilities through the next few months. Sales have decreased in light of the recession and sales forecasts for next year are dwindling. American manufacturers on the whole have a higher operating budget then their foreign counterparts and it is unquestionable that some restructuring will need to begin in order to be competitive in the next decade. But those costs are mostly borne from legacy decisions as the manufacturers have renegotiated current and future obligations with the UAW. Maybe it make sense for a merger so the Big 3 becomes the Big 2. Restructuring will certainly need to happen to lower costs and remove dealer networks which are simply too large.
Some would tell you that Detriot hasn't built a good, solid competitive car in decades. But this just isn't true. I attended the New England Auto Show this weekend and in my personal opinion the current and 2010 lineup from both Ford and GM is both impressive and competitive. The Chevy Malibu, a bread and butter mid size sedan that competes with the Toyota Camry and Honda Accord in the largest segment in the U.S, just topped JD Power's Initial Quality Study. The Ford Fusion also topped that list and the 2010 model looks and feels just that much better. Both GM and Ford already have hybrid versions of their mid-size vehicles. Ford also plans to bring back the fuel efficient Fiesta to the states as part of its One Ford strategy which brings popular European models to the states.
What I find most appalling about the groveling is that when the financial industry needed a true bailout, the CEOs of these companies weren't required to appear before Congress and be belittled by members of Congress. Instead, they had explicit support from the federal government itself in the form of Ben Bernanke and Henry Paulson, who himself partially contributed to this mess as CEO of Goldman Sachs. If the current Treasury Secretary was a former CEO of an automotive company, don't you think that person would have appeared before Congress in support of these bridge loans?
The American Automotive Industry, both directly and indirectly through suppliers, school systems, retail and commercial outlets, employs millions of Americans. In a time of recession when already a million people have lost their jobs this year, it would be insane not ensure the industry's current and long term survival.
|
|
Last Updated ( Tuesday, 09 December 2008 11:02 )
|
|
Written by Adrock
|
|
Monday, 17 November 2008 11:52 |
|
Reason #1: Live Action Puppies
|
|
Written by Fenlenium
|
|
Thursday, 13 November 2008 15:49 |
|
Recently, one of the most cynical people I know admitted to being excited about the results of the election; he was "glad we didn't get the old man." This person is no bleeding heart, more of a gun-toting entreprenuer. Anyway, even he was affected. Let's hope Obama fulfill all that promise.
P.S. More evidence the optimism is real: "The term "Obama Baby" has joined the English language amid speculation that Tuesday's crowds of emotionally charged voters probably went home and just cold got it on. The Urban Dictionary Web site now offers the definition: '1. Obama Baby: A child conceived after [ Barack] Obama was proclaimed President by way of celebratory sex.'"
|
|
Last Updated ( Friday, 14 November 2008 13:18 )
|
|
|