On The Fear Of Government, Or, Let's Get Back To Basics

by: fake consultant

Thu Mar 11, 2010 at 02:30:47 AM EST

All around us...in every town...on every corner...a massive Army Of Fear is standing by, according to the Messengers, ready at a moment's notice to obey the dictates of some unappointed Czar or another.

Just ask Glenn Beck: concentration camps for the white people, jackbooted stormtroopers ready to snatch the guns from your cold dead fingers...Socialist Government-Controlled Healthcare That Threatens Your Not Socialist Medicare...it's all coming, my friends-and unless we organize, as a community, to return to the values of the Founding Fathers, The Government, meaning that awful Obama and Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid and George Soros and all the other Evil Community Organizers, will win.

There's no government, we're told, like no government.

You know who would find all of this fear of self-government just entirely bizarre?

The Founding Fathers.

In today's conversation we'll consider the fundamentals of American patriotism, we'll ask one of those Founding Fathers how he saw the role of Government-and we'll toss in a few words from Abraham Lincoln, just for good measure.

On Assigning Blame, Or, "So, You Think I'm Retarded?"

by: fake consultant

Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 16:48:55 PM EST

LANGUAGE WARNING: Today's story is uncharacteristically blunt, and from this moment forward we will be using lots of inappropriate language in making our points.

Gentle Reader, you have been officially...warned.

With that in mind, if you take offense when confronted with language strong enough to knock a fuckin' buzzard off a shitwagon, please stop reading now.

It is by now fairly well known that Rahm Emanuel, President Obama's White House Chief of Staff, had a bit of a blow-up with liberals who were ready to start running ads against "blue dog" Democrats who were working very hard to shut down the health care reform effort.

Now we're not gonna get in the middle of that argument today; instead, since we're finally getting a chance to talk, I figured me and Rahm could get a few other things out of the way that have been on everyone's mind for the past year or so.

On Health Care, Vegas-Style, Or, Figure It Out In The Ambulance, Chump

by: fake consultant

Wed Feb 10, 2010 at 03:51:58 AM EST

For us it wasn't a matter of life or death, but it is the kind of story that explains, perfectly, why we need to reform the health care system we have today-and for that matter, it's also a great explanation of why a single-payer system would be a giant step forward for everyone in this country, whether you're insured today or not.

It's also hilarious and sad and frustrating, all at the same time-which makes today's story a pretty good allegory for the current American way of doing health care.

So follow along, have a good laugh...and at the same time, take a minute to consider what could be, and how much less irritating things should be.

NY-Sen: Cooper Announces He Won't Run; Endorses Gillibrand

by: robert.harding

Mon Dec 14, 2009 at 14:20:17 PM EST

Today, Cooper held a press conference announcing the he will not run against Gillibrand. In addition, he announced that he is endorsing Gillibrand for Senate believing her to be the best candidate for the job.

In a tweet, Gillibrand said she was "honored" by the endorsement.

I am honored to receive the endorsement of one of Long Island's great leaders and champions of LGBT rights, Majority Leader Jon Cooper.

Cooper was considered a long-shot candidate because he would enter the race trying to make the leap from county legislator to U.S Senate. He would be in a better position than Jonathan Tasini, but still would face long odds.

Cooper's exit means that no elected officials from New York will face Gillibrand (unless something changes over the next several months).  

On Determining Impact, Or, How Stimulative Is Stimulus?

by: fake consultant

Tue Nov 17, 2009 at 20:14:30 PM EST

To make a long story short, our questioner wants to know why, on the one hand, despite the passage of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA, also known as the "stimulus"), unemployment in the construction industry continues to increase, and, on the other hand, why there is such a giant disparity, on a state-by-state basis, in the cost of saving a job?

They're great questions, and, having done a bit of research, I think I have some cogent answers.

On Paying For Immoral Things, Or, Is Stupak On To Something?

by: fake consultant

Tue Nov 10, 2009 at 08:17:45 AM EST

The Amendment, which is apparently intended to respond to conservative Democrats' concerns that too many women were voting for the Party in recent elections, was attached to the House's version of healthcare reform legislation that was voted out of the House this weekend.

The goal is to limit women's access to reproductive medicine services, particularly abortions; this based on the concept that citizens of good conscience shouldn't have their tax dollars used to fund activities they find morally repugnant.

At first blush, I was on the mild end of the wailing and gnashing spectrum myself...but having taken a day to mull the thing over, I'm starting to think that maybe we should take a look at the thinking behind this...and I'm also starting to think that, properly applied, Stupak's logic deserves a more important place in our own vision of how a progressive government might work.

It's Political Judo Day today, Gentle Reader, and by the time we're done here it's entirely possible that you'll see Stupak's logic in a whole new light.

On Projecting R-71's Outcome, Or, We Visit A Political Party

by: fake consultant

Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 01:47:44 AM EST

In the first story of our three-part series we discussed Washington's unusual vote-by-mail system; in the second we examined the pre-election polling.

Today we talk about what happened Election Night at the R-71 event and where the vote count stands today...and where it might end up when we're all done.

We have lots of geeky electoral analysis ahead-and as a special bonus, we have video of the event, including an exclusive interview with Charlene Strong, the woman who became one of the icons of the pro-71 campaign.

It's a lot to cover, so we better get right to it.

On Using Mr. Bullhorn, Or, DC Health Summit Thursday: Come Say Hi...Loudly

by: fake consultant

Wed Oct 21, 2009 at 07:30:02 AM EDT

Part of the reason that opposition was so rabid was because health care interests were spending millions upon millions of dollars doing...well, doing whatever the opposite of giving a distemper shot to the angry mob might be, anyway.

So wouldn't it be great if all the CEOs of all those health care interests were to gather at one time and place so you could, shall we say, gently express your own thoughts regarding the issues of reform and public options?

By an amazing coincidence, that's exactly what's going to happen Thursday in Washington, DC, as the Patient Centered Primary Care Cooperative (PCPCC) holds its Annual Summit.

Follow along, and I'll tell you everything you need to know.

On Learning To Love Homegrown, Or, Baucus' Fundraising Considered

by: fake consultant

Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 04:12:05 AM EDT

We have seen a Democratic Senator propose a policy that would put people in jail for not buying health insurance and a Democratic President who has taken numerous public beatings from those on the left side of the fence for his inability to ram something through a group of people...and yes, folks, the entendre was intentional.

But most of all, we've been asking ourselves: "why would Democratic Members of Congress who will eventually want us to vote for them vote against something that nearly all voting Democrats are inclined to vote for?"

Today's conversation attempts to answer that question by looking at exactly how money and influence flow through a key politician, Montana's Senator Max Baucus-and in doing so, we examine some ugly political realities that have to be resolved before we can hope to convince certain Members of Congress to vote for what their constituents actually want when it really counts.

Opt-Out Provision: Good For Politics

by: robert.harding

Thu Oct 08, 2009 at 21:33:14 PM EDT

The opt-out provision that has been proposed as a compromise is creating quite a stir. Some progressives, like Nate Silver, support the idea. Howard Dean said today that he supports it because it represents reform. Other progressives aren't so sure.

First, a critique. Keep in mind that because we did not start at single-payer, the public option was the progressive proposal instead of the compromise. So now we are in a position where we need to compromise. That's politics. A strong robust public option can pass both houses and a comprehensive health care reform bill should be passed. Progressives need to stand strong and Democrats need to remember which party they belong to and quit siding with the Republicans/conservatives on this issue.

It's real simple: Either you want reform or you want a primary. Your choice.

The opt-out provision can be the compromise. It should be the compromise solution and it isn't complicated. All the opt-out provision does is it allows states to "opt out" of the public option if they do not wish to take part.

Paul Krugman added this on his blog earlier:

So the new idea seems to be a public option offered at a national level, but with states having the right to opt out - that is, make it not available to their own residents.

At first blush, that sounds good. It's true that the states most likely to opt out will probably be small states that really need the competition. But many states, with probably a majority of the population, would opt in. And if the public option works well, there will soon be pressure on politicians in the others to do the same.

I guess there's a possible issue of principle: if states can opt out of one component of reform, why not all? But I haven't noticed principles playing much role in this process! And the idea of putting red-state governors on the spot, having to decide whether to deny their voters cheaper policies, definitely has some appeal.

I emphasized that last part because that is the key portion of this provision which could be our greatest asset.

If you remember back to the discussion about funds from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act and Republican governors saying they would not accept stimulus money for their states, you know that the Republican governors just might pursue the same strategy when it comes to health care reform. Bobby Jindal might say no to a public option for Louisiana. Haley Barbour might say no to one for Mississippi. And who knows what Sarah Palin might have said if she stuck around for the opt-out provision.

The point is that it would be good for the Democrats to put the GOP in this position. If they don't want the public option (or what they call "socialized medicine" and "government-run health care") they can explain that to the citizens of their state instead of disrupting the national debate. States like New York would surely welcome the public option. But the red state governors would be put in a position where they would either have to accept the public option or tell their citizens that the public option won't be offered to them because they would rather put politics above their best interests.

This is not a bad provision. It's a lot better than "triggers" or any other past compromise proposal. Because the reality is that there probably won't be anyone who, as governor, would want to kill the public option in their state out of fear that they would lose re-election as a result.

Sirota Discusses The WFP And How They Scare Both Major Parties

by: robert.harding

Thu Oct 08, 2009 at 20:49:35 PM EDT

Earlier today, Sirota talked about how the WFP has become a power in New York politics and also about how the Democratic and Republican parties fear the so-called "minor" party.

According to the New York Times, the most recent election proves that the Working Families Party "is now the pre-eminent political force in New York City politics." The WFP has achieved this status not through the usual celebritized/glamorized channels of big money television ads and endorsements, but through old-fashioned grassroots work that too much of the much-ballyhooed Washinton-based progressive "infrastructure" ignores/laughs at. The result is that not only have they built power, but they've built durable power - and that scares the bejesus out of both major parties in the Empire State.

As I showed in my latest book, conservatives, led by Rudy Giuliani, have long vilified the WFP. But a few has-been washouts in the old Democratic machine are freaking out as well. What's so hilarious, of course, is that because these washouts are so overcome with rage, they've forgotten some of the most basic lessons of Economics 101. Specifically, check out this op-ed by former New York Mayor Ed Koch (who endorsed George W. Bush) and former city comptroller candidate David Yassky (whose candidacy just got crushed by the WFP's candidate) using McCarthyist "threat" language - and more specifically, check out the crux of their argument about why the WFP is supposedly a "threat":

   "We see danger when narrow agendas overwhelm the public good. That happened this spring in Albany, when the WFP masterminded a whopping 9% increase in state spending in a year when the state's economy is actually contracting."

The danger? Really? I mean...really? Are you out of your friggin' mind?

Sirota concludes his piece by giving this summary of what the attacks on the WFP mean:

Indeed, being attacked - and in particular, being attacked so dishonestly and spastically in such hysterically McCarthyist terms - is the tell tale sign that something has built the kind of genuine power that is feared by the status quo. That's what the WFP has done - and it should serve as a model and inspiration to all of us working in progressive politics.

To add onto what Sirota said, other aspects of the WFP that are different from the major parties include their focus on certain issues. Take, for example, the push for Green Jobs legislation. The WFP was at the forefront, but they shared in the glory with the Democrats who saw the Green Jobs bill pass the Assembly unanimously and pass the Senate overwhelmingly. They worked hard and the bill passed, even though some Republicans tried to take jabs at the WFP in the process.

This is why the major parties (in particular the Democratic Party) finds it so difficult to pass huge legislation like health care reform. The Democratic Party wants health care reform, but for the party, there is not an individual proposal that they want to see passed. They have the "big tent" and welcome all ideas, which is great, but leads to a stalemate.

The WFP has made it clear: They want health care for all. They created a campaign outlining their 10 standards for reform. You won't see the Democrats (or Republicans) doing anything like that.

The Working Families Party is more than just a political party. They are a think-tank and policy-based party that isn't afraid to address major (or minor) issues.

And that's why they scare the major parties. They have had a lot of legislative success, especially here in New York. That's not something you see from a minor party anywhere. But thanks to fusion voting and a strong infrastructure at the WFP, we have such an institution here in New York.  

NY-Sen: Meet Jon Cooper: Still Pondering Run Against Gillibrand

by: robert.harding

Mon Sep 21, 2009 at 16:41:51 PM EDT

Last week, I spoke with Cooper about his possible candidacy, his career and why he is interested in running for a seat that was once held by Hillary Clinton, Daniel Patrick Moynihan and Robert F. Kennedy.

At first, Cooper dismissed the notion that a former Republican U.S. senator from New York - the same man Senator Chuck Schumer beat in 1998 - would be at a ceremony for Republicans. But, much to his dismay, there D'Amato stood mere feet away from Gillibrand as she was introduced as New York's newest senator.

Cooper makes it clear that he has ideas. He isn't just going to run an anti-Gillibrand campaign, but he can't help but point out her record. He mentions her past ties to Big Tobacco, the 100 percent rating she received from the National Rifle Association and her evolution on numerous issues that could be perceived as politically convenient.

"Her past position (on gun control) was of concern," he said. "There are some people are distrustful of her evolution on this and other issues and are concerned about what they see as flip-flopping and see this as insincere or they question her character. I'm not saying I do. But there are those who do."

For Cooper, however, it is different. He is not yet a declared candidate but he is touting his own record and why, if he were to run, he should be considered a serious contender to Gillibrand.

"I have, many times over the years, took stances that might not have been politically popular with my constituents but I believed it was the right thing to do," he said.

As an openly gay and happily married man, Cooper is the father of five children he and his spouse Rob have adopted. He has served 10 years on the Suffolk County Legislature and currently is the majority leader for the legislature's Democrats. He lists two key pieces of legislation as highlights of his career. He wrote the first law banning the use of hand-held cell phones while driving in the country. Since then, a number of states (including New York) have adopted such laws. In addition to that, Cooper also authored legislation that banned the sale of ephedra. That effort led to the federal government imposing a ban on the dietary supplement.

Jobs and the economy is an area that Cooper knows all too well. Cooper is running the family business, Spectronics Corporation, in Westbury. He said that while he is on the corporate side of things, he also is very much pro-labor and supports workers.

In the 2008 presidential primaries, Cooper backed an underdog named Barack Obama. Cooper was the first elected official from New York to endorse Obama and went on to be the Long Island chair of the Obama campaign. He said that, at the time, people asked him if he realized the political risk he was taking. Cooper said he had supported Hillary Clinton in the past but once he met Obama, he was sold. It was through the Obama campaign that Cooper met many grassroots organizers, some of whom are now aiding him in his exploratory efforts and organizing meet and greets throughout the state for people to meet him. Cooper was in upstate New York this weekend meeting voters in Buffalo and Rochester and will be back in upstate New York again, especially if he decides to run.

Cooper knows that he has a long way to go. He realizes that Gillibrand has millions in her bankroll. He realizes that she has received nearly every county chair's endorsement to date. But one thing he references to is that Obama was counted out too. No one thought Hillary Clinton could be beaten. But with the greatest grassroots campaign ever, Obama pulled it out in the primary and won the general election.

A vast majority of Obama organizers and activists that Cooper worked with in 2008 are urging him to run and are supporting him. Democratic clubs have urged him to run. Progressives are supporting him. And while he says he isn't comparing himself to Obama, the comparisons are glaring.

"The party establishment, for the most part, quite understandably is falling in line behind our Democratic incumbent senator regardless of how she got to that office," he said. "But she's the incumbent Democrat now and I expect most of the political establishment to back her. But a lot of the grassroots leaders that had been early supporters of Obama seem to be lining up behind me or at the very least, urging me to run so that we will have a choice, which is what this is all about: Offering Democrats in New York State a choice."

While Cooper doesn't have a full slate of issues on his platform yet (understandable at this stage), his platform stresses the importance of economic development, pushes for progressive values and support of the environment and the fight for health care, consumer protection, gun safety and middle class tax cuts.

So when will we know whether or not Cooper is running? He says by the end of the year he will have a decision. He is testing the waters right now to see just how much support he has and what the response is statewide. I spoke with him over the weekend and he seemed to be very pleased and excited by the response in Buffalo and Rochester. So we'll see just how far he is willing to go and if he is going to make an upset bid for the U.S. Senate.

On Understanding Your Market, Or, Mr. Obama, We Need To Talk

by: fake consultant

Wed Sep 09, 2009 at 13:16:26 PM EDT

What are you gonna do? Do we follow the traditional Democratic Party legislative process of passing...something...at any cost, assuming the entire time that the Left and the Netroots will "go along with the program", or is there a risk that the calculus doesn't work as well today as it did in 1994 and 1996?

Well, lucky for you, I'm a fake consultant, and I know a few things about your "target market", so before you answer that question...we need to talk.

On Disarmament, Or, How Congressman Larsen Made A "Town Hall" Work

by: fake consultant

Sat Aug 15, 2009 at 23:25:09 PM EDT

I attended one of these meetings, and based on what I saw I'm here to tell you that it is possible to hold an event that features none of the images previously described.

Instead, what I say was an event where people asked their questions, the Congressman answered-and from time to time the angry members of the audience got their shout on, too...but not in a way that was able to ever take control of the venue.

There were helpful lessons that can be applied by others who want to have these meetings, and today's conversation examines what can be done to make them work for you, too.

Obama, Lipton, To Seize World's Teabags

by: fake consultant

Tue Aug 11, 2009 at 05:15:42 AM EDT

The goal of the plot: to disrupt protesters' plans to save America from the destruction of our health care system.

FNS reporters have been following a trail of information that includes airport noise abatement records, classified documents, and the testimony of insiders, some of whom are now willing to be publicly identified.

We'll begin our story by reporting on three events that occurred the evening of Friday, August 8th.

NY-Sen: Serrano Says He Won't Challenge Gillibrand; Won't Endorse Yet

by: robert.harding

Mon Aug 10, 2009 at 11:32:23 AM EDT

Add Rep. Jose Serrano to the list of House Democrats taking a pass on 2010 primary challenges to their former colleague, Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand.

Serrano, a 35-year veteran public official from the Bronx who said back in May that he would consider taking on Gillibrand if no one else was willing, told me yesterday he isn't willing to risk his seat to do so

But Serrano remains concerned about the process by which Gillibrand was plucked from relative political obscurity by Gov. David Paterson and the subsequent "pressure" to which would-be contenders like Reps. Steve Israel and Carolyn Maloney were subjected to clear the field for her next fall.

"No, I'm not running," the congressman said during a telephone interview. "But I was not pleased with the selection, and I'm not pleased with the style and the pressure on Maloney and everyone else to get them out."

"I've been in office 35 years...I've never seen this type of pressure to get candidates out of the way. The White House, the vice president, the senator (Chuck Schumer). This was incredible."

"Here we are, and it looks like she's going to get a clear ride. Very few times in politics do you get to be that lucky, and there's no other way to say it but 'lucky.'"

There is the perception that President Barack Obama and other Democratic leaders have forced out the rest of the field. The only representative you could say was "forced out" was Congressman Steve Israel, who chose not to run after talking it over with President Obama.

When Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney announced she would not run on Friday, it was clear that she came to that decision on her own. While there may have been pressure, that pressure has been applied for months. Her decision not to run wasn't based on that pressure. Her decision not to run was based on some of the same reasons why Serrano won't run: Doesn't want lose seniority for congressional district in the House and doesn't want to start as a junior member in a new house.

The line about Gillibrand being selected from "relative political obscurity" made me chuckle. Gillibrand, while only a one-term congresswoman from an upstate district, has been a prolific fundraiser. Also, since when are you in "obscurity" if you are a member of Congress? Maybe you don't have the profile that someone like Sen. Chuck Schumer does. But it's not like Gillibrand was an unknown in political circles. Gillibrand raised nearly $4.5 million in 2008 for her re-election campaign. That was nearly as much as Israel, Maloney and possible Republican challenger Peter King combined. I don't like using money as a key indicator, but being able to raise that kind of money from an upstate district says a lot about her political credentials.

It looks like the push is still on for a Democratic primary. I wish the focus would shift from finding an opponent to taking a serious look at the job Gillibrand is doing as our senator.

NY-Sen: NRSC Still Learning How To Use The Internets

by: robert.harding

Wed Jul 22, 2009 at 16:13:48 PM EDT

But in their attempt at an attack on Gillibrand, they showed just how inept the Republicans are (and have been) at utilizing the Internet as a political tool.

If you go to the post titled, "Paterson Appointee Puts Politics Before Principles", you will see the press release from the NRSC. But the starting text is not part of the press release.

This is how the start of the press release reads:

Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}

Not only is that bad, but because of their apparent coding failure, the title is mashed together. You can still make it out, but it overlaps and looks rather beginner-like.

I should also note that this was brought to my attention earlier today. As of 4:00 p.m., it still wasn't fixed. So apparently the NRSC is going for substance over style, even though there isn't much substance and not a whole lot of style either.

UPDATE: As Dan indicates in the comments, if you go to the press release that I mentioned in this story, it no longer exists. How embarrassing it must be for the individual (or individuals) who left that up all day. Do they not read the material once it is posted? It was just a foolish mistake and yet, it was there for the whole day.

On Aerodynamics, Or, Space: The Budget Frontier

by: fake consultant

Wed Jul 22, 2009 at 01:43:12 AM EDT

An event so monumental that the memory lingers on, even though the venue where the event took place has been, shall we say, "repurposed".

But we're not here to talk about the time that Minnesota Twins Manager Billy Martin appeared on the cover of Sports Illustrated.

Instead, let's talk space.

NASA is forever trying to interest the world in space exploration...and forever struggling to come up with the money to get things done.

Well, I'm not a scientist, nor an engineer, and I don't assemble rocket vehicles...but I am a fake consultant, and if NASA took my advice, I'd bet my fake paycheck that money would be a lot less of a problem.

A Fake Consultant Exclusive: Political Robots Fail In Operational Service

by: fake consultant

Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 03:08:13 AM EDT

As you undoubtedly are aware, three high profile 'bots from Robotican™ Labs have recently experienced major failures.

It was originally thought that the problems were isolated to the Robotican™.1 Congressional Series of Devices...but it is now known that the failures also extend to the .2 Gubernatorial Series as well.

In today's story we will examine what is known about these failures, how they may impact other devices in Political Service, and what solutions might be available to address these issues.

On Gay History, Or, This Is Not A Stonewall Story

by: fake consultant

Wed Jul 08, 2009 at 06:59:47 AM EDT

It's not that I'm in some way insensitive to the subject; instead it's more of a desire, once again, to stay off the beaten path.

And in that spirit, I do indeed have a story of Gay History...but it's not from the Summer of '69...instead, this story was already well underway before the Summer of '29.

So put on something très chic and let's head on over to Harlem...at the time of the Renaissance...because it's time to meet Gladys Bentley.