Voters in Florida aren't exactly crazy about Charlie Crist, but now that they've had Rick Scott, Crist may look a lot better in retrospect:

It was just a matter of time. Charlie Crist is becoming a Democrat.

Crist — Florida’s former Republican governor who relished the tough-on-crime nickname “Chain Gang Charlie” and used to describe himself variously as a “Ronald Reagan Republican” and a “Jeb Bush Republican” — on Friday evening signed papers changing his party from independent to Democrat.

He did so during a Christmas reception at the White House, where President Barack Obama greeted the news with a fist bump for the man who had a higher profile campaigning for Obama’s reelection this year than any Florida Democrat.

The widely expected move positions Crist, 56, for another highly anticipated next step: announcing his candidacy for governor, taking on Republican incumbent Gov. Rick Scott and an untold number of Democrats who would challenge him for the Democratic gubernatorial nomination.

Florida Dems are very unhappy about this. OFA has done an end run around their process without even consulting them, and pretty much sidelined their efforts to get a progressive Democrat back in the state house. Think about all the races that OFA absolutely ignored. Why support Charlie Crist, who has all the integrity of a used car salesman? (Comparing the two is probably an insult to used care salesmen everywhere.)

One Florida activist told me that Morgan & Morgan (the tobacco settlement law firm where Crist is affiliated and one of the biggest funders of the Florida Democratic Party) have put a "no money unless Crist is your candidate for Governor" string, "and everyone at the top has grabbed hold of the string without thinking twice."

And it's also rather widely known that Charlie Crist has a Jim McGreevy problem. I wonder how the Bible thumpers of Florida will react when the Republicans start pushing the story they kept under wraps -- as long as Charlie was a Republican.

In Kirkland, WA, on Saturday, Markos Moulitsas, founder of Daily Kos hosted an afternoon reception followed by a townhall event in Seattle for Darcy Burner who is seeking a congressional seat in Washington's first district.

In a first for Moulitsas, he explained to the crowd "If like me, you think Congress is broken, that we have a lot of work to do to pull it out of the mess it is in, one vote is not enough. This is the one race in the entire country right now where I can look at a candidate and say "She is going to give us more than one vote." She is going to be able to corral people, bring them together and help build a movement that moves not just the party forward...but the country forward. That is why I am here, and that is why I wholeheartedly support Darcy Burner."

Ms. Burner has been a featured "chat" guest here at CrooksandLiars for Blue America. If you're so inclined, you can donate to Darcy Burner's campaign on her Blue America page.

There's nothing to see here. Move along. Nothing, that is, but this report of a minor incident in Russellville, Arkansas: “Democratic Congressional candidate Ken Aden’s campaign manager returned home to find his family pet slaughtered, with the word 'liberal' painted on the animal’s corpse.”

A statement from the Aden campaign describes the cat as an adult mixed-breed Siamese and included a graphic description of the pet's injuries.

The statement said that the four children of campaign manager Jacob Burris “discovered the gruesome scene as they exited the family vehicle to enter their home” after “the perpetrators scrawled 'liberal' across the cat’s body and left it on the doorstep of Burris’ house."

“To kill a child's pet is unconscionable,” the candidate is quoted as saying.

I know, I know. It's not the most important story in the news this week. In a time of war and financial crisis, there are a lot bigger stories to report than the death of a house cat. It was just an ordinary pet like millions of others, a playmate to some children and a companion to their parents.

Nor is this an electoral scandal. The Aden campaign said they “did not believe the Womack campaign to be responsible,” adding that “before Christmas ... a (radio) station owned by Womack’s father, actually promoted a toy drive held by Aden’s campaign for children in the Third District.”

People, especially conservatives, will rush to say it's an isolated incident of random violence that could've happened to anyone. They've said that before. Lots of times, in fact.

The shooting of churchgoers at a liberal Unitarian church in Knoxville was an isolated incident.

The shooting of police officers in Pittsburgh was an isolated incident.

The shooting of deputies in Okaloosa, Florida was an isolated incident.

The killing of a Tucson man and the shooting of his wife and daughter (the nine-year-old was shot in the head at point-blank range) was an isolated incident.

The murder of an African-American woman and the raping and wounding of her sister, followed by the killing of a homeless man, was an isolated incident.

The killing of an African-American security guard at the Holocaust Museum was an isolated incident.

Except …

Continue reading »

This is a terrific, upbeat, positive ad for Democrat Scott McAdams, who is a far better choice for Alaska Senator than Joe Miller. It introduces him, gives some background, and portrays him as a "regular guy." Spread the word.

Elena Kagan has been confirmed by the Senate to become the newest Associate U.S. Supreme Court justice by a vote of 63-37. For the first time in history, three women will serve as Supreme Court justices at the same time.

As Senate confirmation battles go, this one was fairly low-key. Republicans spent a lot of time claiming she was anti-gun and pro-abortion, but with very little evidence to support their claims. The best they could do was to offer an argument about her lack of judicial experience -- an argument some Democrats also used against her.

The sole dissenting Democrat was Ben Nelson, who may call himself a Democrat, but never fails to bolster the Republican vote count. At the last minute, Sen. Scott Brown (R-MA) announced his opposition to Kagan's nomination, resting on the "lack of experience" excuse, but really just buying some political cover back home.

More from the AP on Kagan here.

People For the American Way released this statement:

“Americans should be proud that Elena Kagan was confirmed to the Supreme Court today. She brings to the bench sterling credentials and a formidable intellect. Her commitment to the Constitution and equal justice under law will serve the Court well in the decades ahead

“During her hearings, Elena Kagan spoke powerfully about the Constitution as a timeless document, constructed by its framers to be interpreted over time in light of new situations and in new contexts. She articulated a view of the Constitution and the role of judges in sharp contrast to Chief Justice Roberts’ misleading analogy to an umpire calling balls and strikes. Solicitor General Kagan made clear that she has the intellectual fortitude and the command of the law to keep faith with our Constitution--its amendments, its history, and its core values like justice and equality under the law.

“Thanks to today’s vote, the Supreme Court will have three female Justices for the first time in our nation’s history. This is an historic step forward for all Americans, and an advancement of which every citizen should be proud.”

Update: Kagan will be sworn in at 2pm on Saturday at the Supreme Court.

Some good news for the people who were left hanging this month (but no new benefits tier to help those who ran out entirely). But at least this will help some people, and hopefully it will pass uneventfully:

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said Wednesday that the Senate would vote move forward with reauthorizing unemployment benefits on Tuesday morning, after the replacement for the late Sen. Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.) has been sworn in.

Republicans and Nebraska Democrat Ben Nelson have been preventing a final vote on the bill because of its $33 billion cost. Reid said the GOP filibuster, which has prevented more than 2.1 million people from receiving checks, is designed to crater the economy. "They're betting on failure. They think the worse the economy is come November, the better they're going to do election wise," said Reid. "Almost two million people who are long-term unemployed. These are not numbers. They are people."

Congress allowed extended benefits for people who've been out of work for longer than six months to lapse at the beginning of June. Since then Senate Democrats have repeatedly failed to muster 60 votes to overcome the deficit reduction demands of the Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) and the Republican party. In the final vote just after Byrd's death at the end of June, Democrats came up just one yea short.

And in other news, all the Republican senators have embraced the formerly-deplored position of Jim "Tough S**t" Bunning. I think I will start referring to them as "T.S. Republicans."

However, most voters are on the side of those without work:

Two national polls released Tuesday revealed that registered voters think it's more important to help the unemployed than to reduce the deficit.

Voters are generally wary of government spending to boost the economy, but they nevertheless told ABC News and CBS News that the deficit is no reason not to help the unemployed.

Fifty-two percent of voters told CBS that Congress should extend unemployment benefits "even if it means increasing the budget deficit," including 35 percent of Republicans. Sixty-two percent of registered voters told ABC Congress should extend benefits despite concerns that doing so "adds too much to the federal budget deficit."

In a Bloomberg survey, 70 percent of voters said reducing unemployment is more important than reducing the deficit. But only 47 percent said Congress should reauthorize extended benefits, which in some states provided the unemployed with up to 99 weeks of checks.

A poll commissioned by the National Employment Law Project in June found that 74 percent of voters think helping the unemployed is more important than reducing the deficit.

Back in early 2008 when the primaries were heating up between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, a friend with contacts in high corporate places whispered a secret in my ear. The secret he told: Money sources will tighten and corporations will hoard cash in an effort to make whichever Democrat is elected a one-term wonder.

At the time I shook it off as wishful thinking. After all, he's one of those corporate guys, and saw the handwriting on the wall. Knowing he wouldn't get another Republican administration for awhile (If I had my way, it would be forever), he was just whispering silly scare threats in my ear to suppress any enthusiasm I might have had for a Democratic President.

Fast forward to July, 2010 and his words practically scream at me. Anyone who doubts what is happening in this country right now should go read Fareed Zakaria's column about why corporations are hoarding cash. Hoarding to the tune of nearly 2 TRILLION dollars, by the way.

Continue reading »

Kansas Republican Kevin Yoder is running for Congress, attempting to win a seat long held by Democrat Dennis Moore. In Yoder's new campaign advertisement you see him walking around on a farm with his wife and children and chatting at a diner with locals in what appears to be your garden variety ad. The problem is, according to The Pitch - Yoder and his wife have no children.

What a good-looking family. In his new campaign video for Congress, Kevin Yoder appears to have a photogenic, all-American brood: three adorable girls and a boy, who seem to embody the heartland values Yoder espouses in his new campaign video. Except those aren't Yoder's children.

If you just watched the video and didn't know any better, you'd think these were Yoder's kids. They're not. They're likely his nieces and nephew (or models hired for cuteness).

While misleading and creepy, that alone wouldn't be much of a story. But, thanks to a very observant blogger, we find out that Yoder not only hired other people's children to give the impression he was a "family man," he also hired right wing, anti-tax lobbyists and a Delta Dental executive to pose as regular, working folk:

But what Pitch didn't notice, but we at DOTR did, is that while the ad has plenty of other people's children, Yoder also gathered some of his favorite lobbyists to play "real people" for him to "meet" in a "diner."

Why there's Ken Daniel, the conservative anti-tax advocate, in the brown coat next to Yoder at 0:33. And that's Dan Murray at 0:59. You remember him - he's the Kansas director for the right-wing National Federation of Independent Businesses and a frequent Statehouse visitor.

Even former legislator and current Delta Dental insurance executive Dean Newton makes several appearances, bringing his whole family to "meet" Kevin at 1:03 before giving an unconvincing "I'm a Yoder voter" at 1:21. Read on...

Yoder's Democratic opponent is Stephene Moore (Dennis Moore's wife) and here is her website. If you're so inclined, click through and show her some love.

Thus is refreshing news.

Justice Department officials told Arizona's attorney general and aides to the governor Friday that the federal government has serious reservations about the state's new immigration law. They responded that a lawsuit against the state isn't the answer.

"I told them we need solutions from Washington, not more lawsuits," said Attorney General Terry Goddard, a Democrat.

The Justice Department initiated separate meetings by phone and face-to-face in Phoenix with Goddard and aides to Republican Gov. Jan Brewer to reach out to Arizona's leaders and elicit information from state officials regarding the Obama administration's concerns about the new law.

The strong message that the Justice Department representatives delivered at the private meetings – first with Goddard, then with Brewer's staff – left little doubt that the Obama administration is prepared to go to court if necessary in a bid to block the new law, which takes effect July 29.

Goddard said he noted that five privately filed lawsuits already are pending in federal court to challenge the law.

"Every possible argument is being briefed," said Goddard, who is running unopposed for his party's nomination for the governor's race.

Brewer, who is seeking re-election, later said in a statement that her legal team told the Justice Department officials that the law would be "vigorously defended all the way to the United States Supreme Court if necessary."

The department officials, Brewer said, "were advised that I believe the federal government should use its legal resources to fight illegal immigration, not the state of Arizona."

Maybe Orrin Hatch can come up with a Kris Kobach Amendment and send a person or persons to jail for up to six months if they are instrumental in passing state legislation that allows racial profiling.
Anyway, even the WSJ admits that the Arizona law is unconstitutional.
Is Arizona’s new immigration law constitutional?

We hit the question briefly on Friday in this post, and the initial answer to the question seemed to be no, that in passing an immigration law, Arizona was improperly stepping into the domain of the federal government.

The NYT’s John Schwartz on Wednesday takes a deeper look at the question. His finding: that, yes, the law probably — though not definitely — runs violates preemption principles, and is therefore unconstitutional.

“The law is clearly pre-empted by federal law under Supreme Court precedents,” said UC Irvine’s Erwin Chemerinsky.

For decades, the role of controlling immigration and enforcing immigration laws has fallen to the federal government, not the states. And the law will likely fail on those grounds, said Chemerinsky.

Every time the Republicans get deficit fever, our allegedly Democratic legislators fall back into the fetal position, muttering, "Please don't hurt me!" Oddly enough, this fever occurs only when there's a Democrat in the White House!

"It's time to start paying for things," said Rep. Kathy Dahlkemper (D-Pa.), a freshman who voted for last year's economic stimulus bill but said she is likely to oppose the next spending package, scheduled to hit the House floor Tuesday. "We've done some good things, but one of the best things we could do right now is get control of our fiscal house."

With the national debt at its highest level in nearly 60 years, the question of whether to cut spending -- and if so, how -- is pitting liberals against conservatives, and Congress against the president. The White House has proposed a three-year freeze in programs unrelated to national security and warned House leaders Friday that it may go farther, targeting the Defense Department for cuts. Meanwhile, House leaders unable to agree on a long-term budget blueprint are considering other ways to signal fiscal toughness, including a one-year budget plan that would cut 2011 spending even more deeply than Obama's freeze.

"We're going to adopt that and may go farther," said Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), a member of the House leadership.

This is so stupid as to defy belief. Instead of reassuring voters that, you know, several Nobel Prize-winning economists say we need to increase spending that stimulates the economy, our Fearless Democrats are falling right in line with the Tea Party's economic disinformation.

Still, House leaders view the spending package scheduled to reach the floor Tuesday as must-pass legislation, saying it would shore up support among key constituencies heading into the November elections. In addition to renewing a laundry list of popular tax credits and deductions, the measure would extend unemployment benefits through the rest of this year and set aside $24 billion to help states close huge budget gaps without layoffs or new taxes. The package would also direct nearly $6 billion to finance summer jobs and settle discrimination lawsuits against the Agriculture Department -- both are top priorities among black lawmakers.

Congressional budget analysts have yet to calculate the price of the package, but senior Democratic aides said it could approach $200 billion, most of it unpaid for by new revenues. Among the big-ticket items is a proposal to postpone until 2014 a scheduled pay cut for doctors who see Medicare patients. While many members favor the delay, its $65 billion cost is causing heartburn in both parties.

Many Democrats also are scrutinizing emergency spending on the economy. Dahlkemper, facing a well-funded Republican car dealer in the blue-collar district she seized from the GOP in 2008, said businesses back home complain that they want to start hiring but are getting few applicants because Congress has repeatedly extended unemployment benefits.

"Now, whether that's true or not, I'm still trying to decipher," she said. "But I think it's something we really need to look at."

Yeah, because as long as they're collecting benefits, they're not willing to accept crap part-time jobs at minimum wage with no benefits. And we can't make it too difficult for businesses that want to take advantage of desperate people, can we?

Watch our brave Democrats run against the very things they've accomplished...