My hat is off to the Illinois GOP media operatives who have launched the Draft Ditka campaign. My guess is it's out of 1871 Media, the smart guys running Illinois Leader and running Tom Cross' online media work.
It's a brilliant tactical move. Of course Mike Ditka would be the nation's absolute worst Senator. Could you imagine him throwing his gum at a Committee Chair if his bill didn't get out of committee? But that's all irrelevant. He's getting media play and everytime they say "Mike Ditka" and "Republican" that's a win for the Republican Party. The Republicans have to appeal to white ethnics / Reagan Democrats / middle-income, culturally conservative guys in some way that muddies their allegiance to the super-wealthy and Wall Street. Mike Ditka is a great way to do it.
And to get Mike Ditka in the converation about the Senate race? Brilliant! They've got *nothing* right now. They don't even have a candidate! And somehow just talking about Mike Ditka as a potential candidate gets more attention than Barack Obama. It's great, great media work by the GOP operatives. Notice the conversation isn't about the almost unprecedented train wreck where there isn't a candidate in mid-July and the potential replacements keep saying no (Rauschenburger pulled out a few days ago). Instead the converation about the IL GOP is about a fresh, fun story involving a Chicago icon. Just great work.
I think that the goal of these savvy GOP operatives is to get Ditka to take the chairmanship of the IL GOP Party after Judy Baar Topinka steps down. Because although Mike Ditka would make a truly awful U.S. Senator, he has the potential to be an amazingly good party chair. He'd raise money. He'd raise excitement. He'd raise spirits. And through the force of his celebrity, he'd soften the moderate/conservative split that haunts the state party. If these guys get Ditka to serve as party chair, then we progressives better start studying them --- and copying their every move.
Where's the Draft Chris Zorich for Party Chair movement? I guess I just started it. . . .
Monday, July 12, 2004
Friday, July 09, 2004
"9/11 Convention OK by Illinois" bill signed into law
In other depressing news, the bill that lets the Republicans hold their convention in New York City in September and *still* put their nominee on the Illinois ballot was signed into law yesterday by Governor Blagojevich.
The bill is SB 2123 and it is now Public Act 93-0686. Check it out here.
I've got to get to Springfield. What a great time to work on bills for 2005. Everyone's just waiting around!
The bill is SB 2123 and it is now Public Act 93-0686. Check it out here.
I've got to get to Springfield. What a great time to work on bills for 2005. Everyone's just waiting around!
Dean v. Nader debate and how much I despise plurality elections
This is a neat thing and congratulations to whatever far-sighted producer for National Public Radio pulled this together: Ralph Nader and Howard Dean will debate Nader's campaign today at 12:30 Central time. It should be on C-Span and on NPR.
What a weird way to pick a president. We have to debate whether someone should even run for the office or not.
That's because we don't hold a runoff election, so the majority of voters can split their votes among somewhat similar candidates, allowing the minority of voters to pick the one winner.
And that's so stupid.
I should disclose here that I'm representing the Nader campaign in Illinois in the challenge to his nomination papers in the state. I'm not a supporter of the Nader 2004 campaign, but I do believe that everyone deserves representation, and more to the point, I do believe that people should have the right to vote for anyone they want.
After all, Senator Kerry basically agrees with the Washington Consensus (empire-sized military, corporate trade agreements). While he'll be a better president than George Bush (and I'm convinced he will be the next president), his Administration will largely follow the basic parameters of the establishment. And that's even more money for the Pentagon, even more troops overseas (we're in 40 nations now) and a push for more corporate trade agreements (and not a push for European Union-style agreements).
Voters and citizens who are against that basic agreement -- not to mention the ridiculous amount of clout that moneyed corporate interests wield in D.C. -- should have a candidate that they agree with.
That shouldn't be a controversial statement, but I can already anticipate the party-line reaction of incredulous dismay to permit this *indulgence* of additional candidates that can split the vote.
Nader's point is a civil rights type of point -- people should always have the right to speak up, run for office and support candidates that advance the progressive agenda. It's hard not to feel like a bully when saying that no one should run for office and attempt to influence policy.
But these stupid, outdated, RIDICULOUS plurality elections! Apparently some state Republican parties are working hard to support the Nader campaign. It's so INFURIATING to me. Only because of a defect in the way we elect presidents (no runoff election, and certainly no instant runoff voting) are we saddled with the Orwellian reality of a Vote for Nader is a Vote for Bush.
It drives me crazy.
Which is why my part-time gig is lobbying to implement electoral reforms, among them instant runoff voting. So, while we're on the topic, consider joining the Midwest Democracy Center. You can paypal right now, and if we're successful we can avoid these horrible debates of democratic people that want more voters to turnout saying to candidates "Shut the hell up and don't try to inspire people to vote."
At least Howard Dean is 100% behind instant runoff voting. He worked fairly hard to try to implement instant runoff voting in Vermont when he was the governor there. It almost happened, too.
I'm politically supporting the Kerry campaign this year, because I'm part of the Oust Bush movement. (But we should admit that Get Rid of Bush is not quite advancing the progressive agenda. It's defensive. Necessary, but not quite what you'd call inspiring.) So we should have several candidates running, and one of them should articulate the progressive agenda (and call for Bush's impeachment, by the way). We just have to get rid of these plurality elections by holding a runoff election, instant or otherwise, so these third party and independent campaigns are unabashedly constructive.
What a weird way to pick a president. We have to debate whether someone should even run for the office or not.
That's because we don't hold a runoff election, so the majority of voters can split their votes among somewhat similar candidates, allowing the minority of voters to pick the one winner.
And that's so stupid.
I should disclose here that I'm representing the Nader campaign in Illinois in the challenge to his nomination papers in the state. I'm not a supporter of the Nader 2004 campaign, but I do believe that everyone deserves representation, and more to the point, I do believe that people should have the right to vote for anyone they want.
After all, Senator Kerry basically agrees with the Washington Consensus (empire-sized military, corporate trade agreements). While he'll be a better president than George Bush (and I'm convinced he will be the next president), his Administration will largely follow the basic parameters of the establishment. And that's even more money for the Pentagon, even more troops overseas (we're in 40 nations now) and a push for more corporate trade agreements (and not a push for European Union-style agreements).
Voters and citizens who are against that basic agreement -- not to mention the ridiculous amount of clout that moneyed corporate interests wield in D.C. -- should have a candidate that they agree with.
That shouldn't be a controversial statement, but I can already anticipate the party-line reaction of incredulous dismay to permit this *indulgence* of additional candidates that can split the vote.
Nader's point is a civil rights type of point -- people should always have the right to speak up, run for office and support candidates that advance the progressive agenda. It's hard not to feel like a bully when saying that no one should run for office and attempt to influence policy.
But these stupid, outdated, RIDICULOUS plurality elections! Apparently some state Republican parties are working hard to support the Nader campaign. It's so INFURIATING to me. Only because of a defect in the way we elect presidents (no runoff election, and certainly no instant runoff voting) are we saddled with the Orwellian reality of a Vote for Nader is a Vote for Bush.
It drives me crazy.
Which is why my part-time gig is lobbying to implement electoral reforms, among them instant runoff voting. So, while we're on the topic, consider joining the Midwest Democracy Center. You can paypal right now, and if we're successful we can avoid these horrible debates of democratic people that want more voters to turnout saying to candidates "Shut the hell up and don't try to inspire people to vote."
At least Howard Dean is 100% behind instant runoff voting. He worked fairly hard to try to implement instant runoff voting in Vermont when he was the governor there. It almost happened, too.
I'm politically supporting the Kerry campaign this year, because I'm part of the Oust Bush movement. (But we should admit that Get Rid of Bush is not quite advancing the progressive agenda. It's defensive. Necessary, but not quite what you'd call inspiring.) So we should have several candidates running, and one of them should articulate the progressive agenda (and call for Bush's impeachment, by the way). We just have to get rid of these plurality elections by holding a runoff election, instant or otherwise, so these third party and independent campaigns are unabashedly constructive.
Thursday, July 08, 2004
Beach closings. . .might have something to do with sewage in the river
So the beaches remain closed in Chicago as we approach the hottest weekend of the last two years.
Gee, you think the fact that we still use the Chicago River as an industrial channel with sewage that doesn't get disinfected might have *something* to do with the bacteria (read: crap) in the Lake?
It is long past time that the Greater Metropolitan Water Reclamation District disinfected all wastewater (read: sewage) before releasing it into the Chicago River.
Gee, you think the fact that we still use the Chicago River as an industrial channel with sewage that doesn't get disinfected might have *something* to do with the bacteria (read: crap) in the Lake?
It is long past time that the Greater Metropolitan Water Reclamation District disinfected all wastewater (read: sewage) before releasing it into the Chicago River.
Wednesday, July 07, 2004
Chicago beaches are closed again. You think the sewage in the river has something to do with that?
In today's Tribune here, the Chicago Park District has closed down almost all the city beachers due to high bacteria count. That means too much crap in the water.
The Park District spokesperson said that animal waste is to blame after a heavy rain.
Well, if animal waste is the problem, how come every beach in the damn world doesn't get closed when there's a heavy rain? Because there are animals (like sea gulls) around every beach.
You think the fact that the Chicago River is essentially an open sewer for the area's wastewater might have something to do with it? This government, the Greater Metropolitan Water Reclamation District, is the elected government responsible for our sewage. And last I heard, they are not disinfecting the wastewater before pouring it into the Chicago River. So when it rains, the sewage pours out of the river and into Lake Michigan. And then the beaches close, because there's too much sewage at the beach.
It is long past time to require the MWRD to disinfect all wastewater.
The Park District spokesperson said that animal waste is to blame after a heavy rain.
Well, if animal waste is the problem, how come every beach in the damn world doesn't get closed when there's a heavy rain? Because there are animals (like sea gulls) around every beach.
You think the fact that the Chicago River is essentially an open sewer for the area's wastewater might have something to do with it? This government, the Greater Metropolitan Water Reclamation District, is the elected government responsible for our sewage. And last I heard, they are not disinfecting the wastewater before pouring it into the Chicago River. So when it rains, the sewage pours out of the river and into Lake Michigan. And then the beaches close, because there's too much sewage at the beach.
It is long past time to require the MWRD to disinfect all wastewater.
Rejected by the Dems. . . boo. . . .
Well, I've been rejected by the DNC. They sent me an email today, saying that the letter was not properly authorized, or some such BS. Anyway, I'm out.
Here's the email.
Dear Dan Johnson-Weinberger:
Last week you were sent a credential allocation letter not properly authorized by the DNCC for press coverage of the 2004 Democratic National Convention.
Upon further review of the overall site capacity at the FleetCenter, we are no longer able to issue your organization a DNCC Press Gallery Credential. We apologize for any inconvenience this may cause.
Again, we thank you for your interest in covering the 2004 Democratic National Convention and wish you well in your endeavors.
Sincerely,
Francesca Gage and Michael Hurlbut
Directors of the DNCC Press Gallery
UPDATE: Here's a CNN story (thanks to my friend Billy for finding this link) that details how 20 bloggers are, like me, the victims of a computer gaffe to get disinvited. Whatever. I guess I'll blog from around Boston, because I'm still going. Maybe somebody else can get me in somehow.
Here's the email.
Dear Dan Johnson-Weinberger:
Last week you were sent a credential allocation letter not properly authorized by the DNCC for press coverage of the 2004 Democratic National Convention.
Upon further review of the overall site capacity at the FleetCenter, we are no longer able to issue your organization a DNCC Press Gallery Credential. We apologize for any inconvenience this may cause.
Again, we thank you for your interest in covering the 2004 Democratic National Convention and wish you well in your endeavors.
Sincerely,
Francesca Gage and Michael Hurlbut
Directors of the DNCC Press Gallery
UPDATE: Here's a CNN story (thanks to my friend Billy for finding this link) that details how 20 bloggers are, like me, the victims of a computer gaffe to get disinvited. Whatever. I guess I'll blog from around Boston, because I'm still going. Maybe somebody else can get me in somehow.
Test from treo
This is just a test to see if I can blog from my phone in anticipation of the DNC. I've got to practice. So check out the USA Today cover story on how Tennessee is looking to cut costs on their Medicaid program (called Tenncare) in order to keep 20% of the population enrolled. Caps on doctor visits and eliminating some brand name drugs. Seems smart to me. I am a big fan of universal or at least widespread government programs (I hate that phrase. . .we need a better one) that serve lots of people. If the price of widespread participation in the program is fewer benefits than if only a few participate, no problem. Serve a little to a lot instead of a lot to a little.
Tuesday, July 06, 2004
I'm in! Dems got me a press credential!
This is great news. I've got a press credential for the Democratic National Convention! I'm going to Boston!
This is pretty damn cool. I don't want to get all Internet-gushy, but can you imagine this happening twelve years ago? Some dude getting a press credential because he writes about politics and people read him, without any printing press or money behind him. Thanks for reading, everybody.
Anyway, you will hear from me LIVE from the floor of the Democratic National Convention! I'm really psyched up about this.
Actually, if I figure out how to get my treo 300 to access blogger.com correctly, maybe I'll type in stuff as it happens. I don't know if I'm going to lug my laptop over there.
And if anyone wants to kick in for my expenses, you can paypal me at dan@djw.info
Thanks, DNC! And thanks to The Truth Laid Bare for the original tip that bloggers are welcome in Boston.
This is pretty damn cool. I don't want to get all Internet-gushy, but can you imagine this happening twelve years ago? Some dude getting a press credential because he writes about politics and people read him, without any printing press or money behind him. Thanks for reading, everybody.
Anyway, you will hear from me LIVE from the floor of the Democratic National Convention! I'm really psyched up about this.
Actually, if I figure out how to get my treo 300 to access blogger.com correctly, maybe I'll type in stuff as it happens. I don't know if I'm going to lug my laptop over there.
And if anyone wants to kick in for my expenses, you can paypal me at dan@djw.info
Thanks, DNC! And thanks to The Truth Laid Bare for the original tip that bloggers are welcome in Boston.
John picks John: Kerry-Edwards ticket. Good call.
John Edwards was probably the best decision John Kerry could make for his vice-president. If Edwards can keep the subject on manufacturing a middle class and the Two Americas -- because that stuff resonates and hits Bush in the soft under-belly of his rich-guy tax-cut policies -- the Kerry campaign can win over those under 35K, high school educated voters that often vote for pro-life Republicans in Bible Belt states. And that ought to win the election.
This is about as unified a Democratic presidential campaign has been that I can remember, in terms of unifying the other presidential campaign. Kerry's campaign rhetoric is straight out of Howard Dean's campaign ("You are the heart and soul of our campaign. You've shattered records and expectations every step of the way. Every time someone said you couldn't do it, you proved them wrong. Because of your incredible grassroots energy and commitment, I wanted to make the first official announcement of my decision to you -- more than one million online supporters at johnkerry.com.") and with Edwards on the ticket and Clark endorsing Kerry early, that puts most of the big guys directly on the same page.
It's like the opposite of the Bill Clinton - Al Gore dynamic where Al Gore's studious, serious, hard-working demeanor helped to temper Clinton's folksy, charming, flesh-pressing style. Here, John Edwards' folksy, charming, flesh-pressing style helps to liven up John Kerry's studious, serious, hard-working demeanor.
This is about as unified a Democratic presidential campaign has been that I can remember, in terms of unifying the other presidential campaign. Kerry's campaign rhetoric is straight out of Howard Dean's campaign ("You are the heart and soul of our campaign. You've shattered records and expectations every step of the way. Every time someone said you couldn't do it, you proved them wrong. Because of your incredible grassroots energy and commitment, I wanted to make the first official announcement of my decision to you -- more than one million online supporters at johnkerry.com.") and with Edwards on the ticket and Clark endorsing Kerry early, that puts most of the big guys directly on the same page.
It's like the opposite of the Bill Clinton - Al Gore dynamic where Al Gore's studious, serious, hard-working demeanor helped to temper Clinton's folksy, charming, flesh-pressing style. Here, John Edwards' folksy, charming, flesh-pressing style helps to liven up John Kerry's studious, serious, hard-working demeanor.
Friday, July 02, 2004
One good thing the Gov did: no special sessions over the weekend
I just found out Governor Blagojevich called in the next special session for Tuesday, instead of tomorrow (and then Sunday, then Monday, then Tuesday).
That's the first class move he's made since he started the special session mess at the end of June. There's no reason to force legislators to sit around over the 4th of July weekend.
Just raise the 3% income tax to 4% and cut corporate welfare and be done with this budget mess!
(Though I guess the burden is on me: what precise corporate welfare programs do I think we ought to cut? Maybe the state funds that support the bonds that built up McCaskey Family Stadium -- I mean, Soldier Field. Or the state funds that built up Enrich Reinsdorf and Company Park. . .I mean, Comiskey. . .I mean U.S. Cellular Field.)
I'm looking for specific line-items. I need some ideas. What should we cut? Comment away, everybody (especially Jeff Trigg). The budget, on Comptroller Dan Hynes' really good (almost overwhelmingly good) website is here.
And by the way. . .GO CUBS!! They just took at 3-2 lead over the Welfare (waah, waah, build me a stadium taxpayers, or I'll move to Florida) Sox.
That's the first class move he's made since he started the special session mess at the end of June. There's no reason to force legislators to sit around over the 4th of July weekend.
Just raise the 3% income tax to 4% and cut corporate welfare and be done with this budget mess!
(Though I guess the burden is on me: what precise corporate welfare programs do I think we ought to cut? Maybe the state funds that support the bonds that built up McCaskey Family Stadium -- I mean, Soldier Field. Or the state funds that built up Enrich Reinsdorf and Company Park. . .I mean, Comiskey. . .I mean U.S. Cellular Field.)
I'm looking for specific line-items. I need some ideas. What should we cut? Comment away, everybody (especially Jeff Trigg). The budget, on Comptroller Dan Hynes' really good (almost overwhelmingly good) website is here.
And by the way. . .GO CUBS!! They just took at 3-2 lead over the Welfare (waah, waah, build me a stadium taxpayers, or I'll move to Florida) Sox.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)