Home / Elections
RALPH WHO?
Also this, which should be headlined. “We Love George Bush So Much We Want to Elect Him Again!” ”“The Nader 2004 Draft Committee has opened offices in New York and San Francisco with plans under way for offices in Washington, New Hampshire and Iowa.”
Presidential candidate and senator John Edwards condemns Howard Coble's comments, and calls for Republican Party to reconsider Coble's chairmanship of House Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security. Is That Legal has the story.
"A Conversation on the Economy with Former US Senator Gary Hart"
The Anderson School at UCLA, Korn Convocation Hall,Los Angeles, CA
Featuring: Merli Baroudi, The Economist Intelligence Unit, Prof. Ed Learner, Director, The UCLA/Anderson Forecast, Bruce Willison, Dean, The Anderson School at UCLA
6:00 PM–6:30 PM Registration
6:30 PM–7:30 PM Program (followed by reception)
Attendance is complimentary. RSVP required.
Event Parking $7
Can someone explain to us the allure of Florida Senator Bob Graham? We can't understand it. He is an avid supporter of the death penalty. Here is some of his voting record on crime and civil rights issues, as disclosed by Project Vote-Smart:
In 1999, Senator Bob Graham voted to pass S 254, the Violent and Repeat Juvenile Offender Act, introduced by Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah). The bill allows U.S. attorneys to prosecute juveniles 14 or older charged with serious violent felonies or serious drug crimes as adults if they certify that there is a substantial Federal interest to warrant the exercise of Federal jurisdiction.
The bill also contains language allowing incarcerated juveniles to interact with adult prisoners where the contact is brief and inadvertent or accidental. (a terrible idea we'll come back to another day). The bill mandates criminal background checks for all gun purchases at gun shows.
After that, he voted to table, or kill, an amendment introduced by Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT) to increase funding for state juvenile court systems [including prosecutors, public defenders, and court staff], establish juvenile drug courts, and increase funding for certain law enforcement programs such as Community Oriented Policing Services [COPS].
In 1999, Graham voted yes on a proposal introduced by Sen. Orin Hatch (R-UT) for a constitutional amendment prohibiting the physical desecration of the U.S. flag. That year he also voted yes on a proposal to declare that erecting religious symbols and praying on public school campuses as part of a memorial service does not violate the First Amendment to the Constitution. Again, the bill was introduced by Orin Hatch.
In 1996 he voted to table or kill a motion by Sen. Daniel Moynihan to send S 735: The Terrorism Prevention Act, back to the joint House-Senate conference committee to have provisions limiting death penalty appeals deleted.
In 1995, Graham voted yes on an amendment to make it easier for law enforcement to do anti-terrorism wiretaps. (S 735: Comprehensive Terrorism Prevention Act). The Amendment was introduced by Joe Lieberman (D-CT).
In 1994, Graham voted to pass HR 3355: The Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, which included included provisions to build more prisons; hire 100,000 new police officers; allow death sentences for more federal crimes; ban 19 semi-automatic assault weapons; and institute 'three strikes and you're out' provisions, among other components.
In 1995, he voted yes on an amendment to S 1935: Congressional Gift Reform Act that rejected the Racial Justice Act provisions, which would have enabled prisoners appealing death penalty sentences to argue racial discrimination using sentencing statistics as part of their appeal.
In 1994, he voted yes on a proposal to mandate confererees to HR 3355, the Ominibus Crime Control Act to insist that states provide for truth in sentencing by requiring that violent felons serve at least 85% of the prison time imposed.
He did vote against the confirmation of Attorney General Ashcroft and against the impeachment of President Clinton, but that's about all we found favorable. What are we missing?
My political career goes back to the '60s and those were times of vigorous debates. But race was not a factor in those debates. The debates were on issues, not about race -- there may have been differences of opinion. But they were never about race. When I was running for mayor I said that half of my major appointments would go to members of the African-American community, and they did. I could cite a long, deep connection with the African-American community. I have a very strong constituency in that community. So in the '60s was it possible that there were some differences of opinion? Yes. But it was never based on race. Never. Not a chance. Not even the people I clashed with in major ways would ever say that.On abortion, he sounds like he's backtracking to us, to cover his recent switch from very pro-life to tolerant of choice (he certainly cannot be called pro-choice). Here's his current "precise" position on the issue.
I support a woman's right to choose, which is guaranteed by the Constitution. And on the other hand, I want to work to create alternatives to abortion. And I think it's possible to do both. Most Americans would like a leader to be elected who steps out of the polarity and tries to reconcile people and recognize that people may hold viewpoints that seem diametrically opposed.But it took him several q's and a's to get there.
On war with Iraq, Kuchinich says there are two conditions that would make him support it: "After an attack on our country or an imminent threat backed by incontrovertible evidence. Those would be my foundations of principle. But no such evidence exists in case of Iraq, and Iraq has not attacked our country."
As to what kind of President he'd be, Kucinich answers:What kind of a president would I be? I'd be the kind of president to reassert America's moral authority by withdrawing this doctrine of unilateralism and of preemption and of first strike, and by working with the world community on matters of global security wherever those matters rear up. The United States, through working with other nations, can address these issues, but we shouldn't be expected to be the policeman of the world. And we -- if we want to retain any moral authority, we have to look at the consequences of our actions....You know, I started my career in politics in 1967. I'm not new to this. I did not just fall off the Christmas tree. I understand the world is complex. I know that there are people out there who want to hurt other people. But the only path to the future is for the United States to cooperate internationally with as many nations as it can. If we go at it alone, we will be stuck alone. My philosophy comes from a worldview that looks at the world as one. It's a holistic view that sees the world as interconnected and interdependent and integrated in so many different ways, which informs my politics. I think this world's ready, and I think the country's there.Kuchinich sounds good on war and foreign relations, but not as good as Gary Hart, and he has way fewer credentials in the area. We don't trust him on the abortion issue. The jury is still out on the race issue--we don't have enough information to call that one. Bottom line: we like him better than Lieberman, Gephardt, and Sharpton, but not as much as Hart or Edwards. And probably a little less than Kerry and Dean. Graham is out for us due to his strong support for the death penalty. In fact, he's the only Democratic contender who has signed death warrants.
However, it's still early and we haven't definitively made up our mind, particularly since the field is not yet closed.
Nathan Newman sticks up for Dennis Kucinich in Racism, Poverty & the Candidates. He also calls Ashcroft the most "anti-liberty Attorney General in the Post-WWII era."
Orcinus (Dave Neiwert) is back from his trip to Idaho and has resumed his series on facism.
Lisa English of Ruminate This says the resignation letter of career diplomat J. Bradley Kiesling to Colin Powell should be required reading for all Americans. He resigned over disagreements with Bush's foreign policies.
Patrick at Electrolite writes about Bush's credibility problems with leaders of other nations.
Hesiod at Counterspin, Jeanne D'arc at Body and Soul and Barry at Ampersand take on the recent leaking of a document that counters justification for war in Iraq. It relates to the Adminstration's misrepresentations of the debriefing of Iraqui defector, General Hussein Kamel, Saddam's executed son-in-law. Newsweek reported on it but apparently left some things out.
Kevin Drum of Calpundit reports on junk science and how to spot it.
And welcome to new blogger Unlearned Hand, who picks up on our post about Bush/Ashcroft/Rumsfeld's potential dismissal of the federal prosecution of Moussaoui in favor of prosecution by military tribunal, and comments:Whatever my feelings about military tribunals (and the possibility that in three years I will be taking part in them), it does seem like the government ought not have it both ways. Either the prisoner should be subject to a civilian criminal court or a military court. Once the civilian court process has begun, it should be allowed to continue. To submit cases to civilian courts but then remove prisoners from that process at the first adverse ruling could do far more to undermine the courts than the tribunal system standing alone.The blogs' author is in law school and upon graduation will begin service as an officer in the Judge Advocate General's Corps. He calls himself an "independent thinker who disagrees with everyone on at least one issue.
With that, we're off to shop for birthday presents for our mother who turns 80 on Monday and due to health issues, can't get out much anymore. Suggestions would be appreciated, we can shop tomorrow too.
KING: Any read on the Democratic contenders? So far they're lining up. A lot of play lately for Howard Dean.[transcript via Lexis.com]MAHER: Howard Dean, yes. I don't know, time will tell.
KING: Anyone jump out at you?
MAHER: You know, I wish Gary Hart would get into it. I'm not sure at this point whether I would say this in a year that I want him to be the candidate, but I think he's interesting. I think he has credentials that other ones don't. No, 1, he was part of the Hart Rudman commission before 9/11, after 9/11.
KING: Told of -- warned of 9/11?
MAHER: And after they put out a report that said no virtual progress. They talked about all of the things that are not being done like guarding the ports, like first responders. All that stuff, it's so boring, it's more fun to go to war. I mean, it's a lot more fun than guarding the ports, whatever, first responders, yada, yada. But Gary Hart has that on his side and he also has the Clinton thing, I think, going for him which is -- he was Clinton before Clinton. Remember?
KING: Yes, he was.
MAHER: And I think he could honestly be the guy to say, you know what, isn't it time that we stop this nonsense because we eliminate people because they are anatomicly correct? Because they have sex and they like women? I suffered for it, Bill Clinton suffered for it. Is the country better off that we cripple these two men?
Gary Hart will be on Crossfire tonight. His speech yesterday in Virginia, Restoration of the Republic, will be available here shortly.
The Denver Post covered the speech.Hart called for a "restoration of the republic," a high-minded ideal of civic involvement and concern for the public good."We are all 'first responders,"' Hart told about 100 students at the University of Virginia. "We're all in this together. The ideal may be more plausible in the 21st century than at any time since the founding."
His high-minded speech to students and others at the school was the third in a quartet of "major policy addresses" Hart is giving as he tests the waters for a dark-horse presidential bid.
But he left some confusion when he was asked, if he didn't run for president, whether he might challenge incumbent Republican Sen. Ben Nighthorse Campbell in 2004. He told the crowd it would be a "tempting prospect" if it would help the Democrats retake the Senate. But in an interview after his talk, he flatly declared, "I'm not running for Senate."
(324 words in story) There's More :: Permalink :: Comments
Basically, in the early days -- before he was running citywide, let alone nationwide -- Kucinich's political schtick was posing as the champion of the 'forgotten' white ethnic voters over against the rising force of black political power. Sort of a great white hope type, or great Slavic hope, if you will.The source article is in Cleveland Magazine, and you can read a copy here. If the site is down due to traffic, try the cached version here.
New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer is gearing up for a 2006 gubernatorial bid. [link via Political Wire.]
Gary Hart will be speaking twice tomorrow at the University of Virginia. It's a new speech addressing means of restoring idealism in America. It's not about foreign policy or war. We've read an advance copy, and think it once again shows that Hart offers something different than the other candidates for President. After 8:00 pm tomorrow, you can read it on Hart's website. Here are the details:
"Restoration of the Republic"
4:15 PM — Student Legal Forum
Caplin Pavilion
University of Virginia School of Law
Charlottesville, VA
February 26, 2003:
"Restoration of the Republic"
8:30 PM — Jefferson Society
Jefferson Hall
West Range, University of Virginia
Charlottesville, VA
On March 4, Hart will be speaking on the economy in Los Angeles.
Update: Hart's latest comment about his possible presidential bid came at a speech in Denver Monday: "I haven't put together an exploratory committee or raised any money, although I might do that pretty soon," he said."
Daily Kos reports that John McCain will run for a 4th term from Arizona. Disappointing, Kos says, because the seat might have gone to a Democrat otherwise.
| << Previous 12 | Next 12 >> |
