Do you have an opinion you want to share? Then register right now and join the conversation.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
This year's June primary was one of the most exciting Democratic Party races in recent memory. Despite record-low turnout, every crucial Bay Area race was decided in favor of an experienced, progressive Democrat. With our help, they will lead our state and our country to a landslide victory this November.
For many in the East Bay, AD 14 was the race to watch. A little background: I am proud to have been one of Councilman Thurmond's early supporters. Tony is a real hero to me, and he ran a solid race. He received the endorsements of every newspaper in the district, but given the role of mail-in ballots and unprecedented low turnout, they came too late to make much of a difference. But I sincerely thank him for running, as well as all of you that worked to help get him elected. I hope we'll be seeing more of Tony Thurmond in the future.
Our future Assemblywoman from the 14th, Nancy Skinner, received over 51% of the vote, a truly remarkable feat in a four-way race. As anyone who has met her can attest, she is an incredibly sharp woman with a real grasp on the issues facing California. In particular, she has years of experience on environmental issues that are close to the hearts of East Bay voters. Once again, our district will have another true progressive representing us in Sacramento. I am sure Nancy Skinner will make all of us proud here in the 14th AD.
Taking from the "sponsors" web page, the following rationale:
Given the many urgent scientific and technological challenges facing America and the rest of the world, the increasing need for accurate scientific information in political decision making, and the vital role scientific innovation plays in spurring economic growth and competitiveness, we, the undersigned, call for a public debate in which the U.S. presidential candidates share their views on the issues of The Environment, Medicine and Health, and Science and Technology Policy. Science Debate 2008.
Early last month, I wrote a post about Rep. Jerry McNerney's most recent bill, H.R. 4042, which he announced as a first step to permanent repeal of the estate tax. Introducing his legislation to the local media, McNerney used a SF Public Utilities Commission employee and part-time rancher, Tim Koopman, as his front-man. Telling the tragic tale of how his family was forced to pay estate taxes on his inherited 850-acre ranch in Sunol, Koopman seemed the perfect pitchman.
The post I wrote, "850 Acres Are A Girl's Best Friend," explored the effect of McNerney's proposal to raise the estate tax exemption for farms and small businesses to $8 million ($16 million per couple) and $2 million ($4 million per couple) for family homes.
Well, I just received an email response to that post from none other than Mr. Tim Koopman:
The opinions and views expressed by a variety of writers participating in the discussion about Congressman McNerneys proposed Federal Estate Tax bill appear to be based upon a load of misinformation and distorted facts. It does not appear that anyone responsible for the content of the initial rant bothered to confirm anything.
If you have any interest in getting some background - please give me a call (925) xxx-xxxx.
I am in fact registered to vote in Alameda County
The final "death tax" total for the Koopmann family, including state in lieu taxes, Federal Estate Tax and capital gain taxes was $747,000 +.
I live in a 1983 model mobile home - not a "median priced house/condo valued at $978,000"
I don't play, and have never played golf
We don't have show horses (little girl's show ponies) for recreational purposes
My question to Alameda County about subdivision/re-zoning for the possible sale of a portion of the ranch was only an attempt to pay off the debt
Your comments were mean spirited and ill advised -
We do have 850 acres of well managed rangeland, that is utilized to graze livestock and provides valuable wildlife habitat and viewshed/open space.
Call me - I welcome a visit so that you at least have some understanding of the issues from my side, or maybe you are not interested in facts
I'm guessing that many of you have seen the video put out by Courage Campaign on Dianne Feinstein and the FISA bill being considered in the Senate.
There has been a flurry of activity today centering around which one of the many versions of the bill that were passed out of committee would be brought to the floor. Now comes word from Sen. Russ Feingold that he and 13 other Senators are urging Majority Leader Reid to take up the Judiciary Committee's version of the FISA legislation. You can read a copy of their letter here.
The letter to Reid was signed by Senators Russ Feingold (D-WI), Chris Dodd (D-CT), Barack Obama (D-IL), Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Robert Menendez (D-NJ), Joe Biden (D-DE), Sherrod Brown (D-OH), Tom Harkin (D-IA), Ben Cardin (D-MD), Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY), Daniel Akaka (D-HI), Jim Webb (D-VA), Ted Kennedy (D-MA), and Barbara Boxer (D-CA).
So please call Dianne Feinstein today and urge her to support Title I of the version of S. 2248 reported by the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Dianne Feinstein
202-224-3841 (Washington, DC)
415-393-0707 (San Francisco)
559-485-7430 (Fresno)
MoveOn just sent out an email to its members asking them to lobby their Congressional representatives on the upcoming (maybe today, maybe tomorrow?) House vote on Iraq appropriations:
According to the Washington Post, Democrats have apparently worked out a "deal" to give President Bush billions of dollars more for Iraq -- no strings attached -- in exchange for increased domestic spending.
The WaPo article details how the leadership (Steny Hoyer and Harry Reid in this case -- Nancy Pelosi seems to be noncommittal at this point) has decided that Democrats must "compromise" with Bush on Iraq in order to gain an additional $11 billion for domestic spending on items such as emergency drought relief in the southeast and the subprime mortgage crisis.
Apparently lost on these master tacticians is the fact that Bush has adamantly stated he will veto any domestic spending appropriations over and above what he has requested. But Hoyer, in demonstrating Democrats' willingness to yield to Bush, has already given away the store. The same article quotes House Minority Whip Roy Blunt: (emphasis added)
Blunt said yesterday that Democrats will give in on war funding, with or without additional money for domestic programs. "There's no reason to make a bad bargain," he said. "The president holds all the cards."
Of course, the president doesn't hold all the cards. He simply holds all the backbone.
I have not contributed much recently. That may be because I have not been pissed off enough to go on a rant. That has changed, thanks to some good reporting by Media News Group's Mike Taugher.
In AD-15 news, the latest Fred Klaske email came out Friday, and aside from the big bombshell that he's dropping $100,000 of his own money into his race, it was vintage Klaske -- that is to say, mostly indecipherable:
Well, NPR did a piece yesterday about how Iraq is fading as an issue in 2008.
The reported decrease in violence in Baghdad may be having an effect on politics at home. Some reports have shown that Iraq has become less of an issue in the presidential campaign.
Congressional representatives say concerns about Iraq remain, but the war is not the only top-tier issue among voters. Many have turned their focus to domestic issues such as health care, energy, the mortgage crisis and immigration.
The NPR story then went on to cite an interview with the Congressman from Stockton to support that thesis.
You can read a transcript of the interview on the flip...
I just received a link to an interesting MySpace site run by a musician who performs under the name Max and the Marginalized. I'll let him describe his work:
This is Max and the Marginalized. It's pretty simple really. There is a horrible shortage of relevant and meaningful political music in a time when we need it more than ever. I write and record (with full instrumentation!) a new song every week that stays firmly in this realm. I hope it means something to somebody and that it makes you dance and think at the same time now and then.
True to his word, Max has been putting up a new song every Thursday for the last nine weeks. They're all pretty interesting, but the one he put up on Nov. 15 really struck a chord with me. I bet you'll understand why. Here are the lyrics:
Banner Year
365 days ago I stayed awake 'til four
Watching the numbers come up from under and give us control of the floor
But if I'd seen it all in a crystal ball I'd have thrown it through the TV
Standing your ground with a spine no thicker than the margin of victory
By degrees you diminished our demand
Swearing to hold them accountable, instead you held their hand
It's been a banner year
So blow the candles out and wish for your convictions that have long since disappeared
And only then might we remember exactly why it is that we brought you here
It's been a banner year
What took place in the next 60 days, I can't quite ascertain
By the time I'd awoken the people had spoken but your ears got messed up on the plane
Up 'til that night you promised a fight, so why'd we acquiesce?
In South Dakota, a man in a coma, well he hardly did much less
Let's address the matter of the vote you took last week
I don't assume wiggle room with those kinds of techniques
It's been a banner year
So blow the candles out and wish for your convictions that have long since disappeared
And only then might we remember exactly why it is that we brought you here
It's been a banner year
Reaching a hand across the divide is not what this is about
No one asked for a compromise, we asked you to get us out
And 365 days from now I'll be watching up 'til the end
And if we give just a little and shoot for the middle then we'll miss the mark again
It's been a banner year
So blow the candles out and wish for your convictions that have long since disappeared
And only then might we remember exactly why it is that we brought you here
It's been a banner year
In an absolutely brilliant essay entitled "Illegals" in America, New Mexico writer Alisa Valdes-Rodriguez (author of The Dirty Girls Social Club) explains how the current Republican anti-immigrant posturing is not only dangerous to ALL Latina/os but to our democracy as a whole. I'm going to quote far more than I usually would because I think it's so important that her message be heard far and wide. However, there is much more of the post at her blog, and I strongly encourage you to go on over and read the whole thing.
Last night, I watched (in high definition, God help me) the Republican presidential candidates flog immigrants some more, with smug little Mitt Romney (best hair of the bunch, worst soul) stating that undocumented children should have no rights to an American education. He was cheered. WTF? He neglected to mention that the parents of those children pay property taxes in their rent money each and every month, and that those property taxes pay for schools. He forgot to mention that those parents, like everyone else, also pay income tax.
It's all fine and good to be a New Mexican Hispano (or Texican, or whatever) opposed to "illegal" immigrants, but there's just one little problem. Listen carefully to what I'm about to tell you: Hate crimes against ALL Hispanics are on the rise as a result of the media's irresponsible assault on (primarily) Mexican immigrants. According to the Anti-Defamation League, hate crimes against Hispanics rose by a stunning 10 percent from 2005 to 2006. Experts attribute this steep climb primarily to right-wing talk radio and cable news shows that blame "illegals" for the economic woes in America.
To the skinhead or white supremacist, there is no difference between a Hispano New Mexican whose family came with a land grant from the King of Spain and a farmer newly arrived to Santa Ana, Calif. from Puebla, Mexico. To them, a Rodriguez is a Rodriguez, and all of us are to blame for the astronomical rise in poverty, loss of health care, failing education and crashing economy in America, under George W. Bush.
When you drive from Albuquerque to Phoenix, and listen to the radio, all you get are right-wing shows, all of them constantly beating the drums of hatred against "illegals," using a term that is invented for the purpose of marginalization and dehumanization and is intentionally misleading. (The "crime" of being in the United States without proper paperwork is a misdemeanor less severe than the "crime" of an old person in Detroit buying prescription medications from Canada, but nowhere do we hear of such people being called "illegal" seniors.) Words are powerful, and whenever the media use the right-wing invention "illegals" to discuss the "issue," the right-wingers have already won because the very terminology sways public opinion. It is the danger and beauty of propaganda done well.
