Some levity

I have not abandoned anything, mind you--not my support of Howard Dean nor my quest to be the "I Feel Lucky" Google result of all the world's wackiest searches. Among them, Jesus's armpits.

This is prompted, of course, by someone's finding me today with did "elizabeth edwards" use her own eggs (I am, sadly, only fourth for that search).

UPDATE: I'm also tempted to add a new daily feature called "What the dog ate," so you can keep up with the different parts of the house that Maggie, um, personalizes. We're down to one and a half windows with any kind of treatment left. Ug.

I'm shaking

I can't literally mainline this politics stuff, but I am actually shaking, jonesing for the results. (It could also be the Chips Ahoy.) If the leaked NH exit poll data were showing Kerry with a solid lead, I wouldn't care. I'd be able to get off my behind and actually do some housework--or even homework. But everything is pointing to the fact that this will be a real tight 1-2 finish. And I'm dying over here.

I've been maintaining for some time that a finish within five or so points--after being down by almost 20 in some polls--will be a moral if not real victory for Howard Dean. Remember, Clinton finished third in Iowa and second in New Hampshire, too. But the numbers--especially the LA Times numbers I hear--put Dean closer than Clinton in 1992.

More importantly, it looks like Clark and Edwards may well stay below 15%, meaning that they would not earn any delegates. So figure that Dean and Kerry get maybe 31% and 37%, repectively. That means Dean would get 8 delegates, Kerry 11. That's durned close, my friends.

Perhaps the best thing that could happen is if Dean wins one of the two congressional districts, which might make those numbers 9 to 10 in favor of Kerry. There is very little in either set of numbers that Kerry can really crow about.

Of course, the exit polling notoriously poor. I mean, after 2000, what's the point? Anyway, the last polls close in less than half an hour, and the real results will start coming in. Until then, the shaking.

UPDATE: After they called it for Kerry, I took a time out and watched "Good Eats" (the cheese one--I love my TiVo!) and talked to my mother-in-law (who called here). I feel a little better, though still sad. My analysis, as always, will be at OSP in the morning.

UPDATE II: The OSP post is here.

(ex) Candidate

Well, my friend Vince Whitacre has withdrawn from the race for the WI 5 CD. Drop by Stacie's blog and let the two of them know how you feel. Even if it's not about the race, man, just let it all out over there.

Vince has endorsed Bryan Kennedy. The other candidate currently in the race is Gary Kohlenberg, who, as it turns out, reads the Daily Kos--I mentioned him in a post there about the race and he emailed me--and has a far snazzier website and a Meetup. At this point, I am officially undecided again, so the link to Vince's site stays in the right column.

On the upside, Vince and Stacie could make a mint selling "vince4congress.com" if this guy ever wants to run for congress.

LOCAL HAPS UPDATE: Well, if your humble folkbum isn't running for Kleczka's seat, there are many who are thinking about it. This includes my state senator, Tim Carpenter. So if my speaking out gets me fired, I could maybe be state senator.

NH #s

I would just like to state that these are preliminary predictions, and that I will post a full and complete prediction of the New Hampshire results sometime Wednesday morning.

Kerry       31%
Dean        27%
Edwards     18%
Clark       14%
Lieberman    7%
Kucinich     2%
Other/ Al    1%

(if you're here for the Dean video, scroll down)
Local Hap'nin's

First of all, Milwaukee electoral politics has gotten even more interesting in the last 48 hours with Congressman Jerry Kleczka deciding not to seek re-election this fall. My wife has basically talked me out of trying for his seat (so we won't be like my friends Vince and Stacie), but if anyone knows how to run a successful congressional campaign on basically no money and without my wife knowing, drop me an email.

But as to the others who may run for the seat: Well, it will remain Democratic. When the state legislature redistricted after the 2000 census, they made all eight of Wisconsin's seats among the safest partisan seats in the nation. My money is on at least one of the unsuccessful mayoral candidates taking a whack at it--David Clarke in particular (as a Republican, I bet), and maybe Tom Barrett (who was a US Rep before giving up his seat in the redistricting) if he doesn't make it.

Also, last week the state Senate failed to override Governor Doyle's veto of the concealed-carry law. The Assembly will get it this week, but our hope was really in the Senate.

The mayor's race is proceeding apace, with Barrett, Clarke, and acting-Mayor Marvin Pratt doing well. The primary is February 17, the day of our presidential primary, and it has me wondering. It's no big secret in this non-partisan race Clarke is a Republican, with big Republican backers both in town and out. What happens when a whole mess of Milwaukee Republicans show up at the voting booths to vote for Clarke, and then decide to take advantage of the open primary to vote in the Democratic presidential primary? Maybe Al Sharpton will take a delegate here in town . . .

Still looking for that Dean video?

This may not be exactly what you want, but I encourage you to go look at the video compilation that Brian Flemming has put together. (Requires Quicktime.)

Howard Dean's Iowa Concession Speech Rant
(I'm the one ranting, not him.)

A lot of people are finding me recently by searching for "Howard Dean Rants." A lot of others are finding this OSP article of mine by searching for "Howard Dean Iowa Concession Speech." People are looking for the speech made to his supporters Monday night that has been widely excerpted and played in the media over the past few days. A number of pundits are certain that his "angry snarling" in the speech--at least the clip they play of it--is the final nail in his coffin.

If you are one of those searchers, I hope you read on. If all you want is to see it, though, click here (in the "Most Watched Video" section; requires Real Player); the clip you have been hearing comes at about 8 minutes, the first minute or so of a ten minute speech--the rest of which you will not hear in the media.

Realize, first of all, that Dean made public concessions in CNN's "Larry King Live," as well as on MSNBC and some other networks. That speech was the "thank you" too his supporters (with nice congrats to Kerry and Edwards that you won't hear in the clips on the radio and TV, not to mention a tribute to Gephardt).

I have seen the speech. And yes, I watched it through Dean-colored glasses, but I watched it. And I loved it.

If you are expecting anger and bile in the speech, you will not find it. The part of the speech you are hearing on the news--the part with the list of states he wants to win, and the now-infamous "Yeeeeeaaaaah!"--is an inspiring, spirited, uplifting rallying cry. He's not angry; he's happy. He's not snarling; he's smiling. You can see it in particular in his eyes.

People once again are mistaking Dean's genuine passion for something else, mostly, I think, because they haven't seen a politician on the national stage recently with genuine anything. And if it isn't "presidential" to be genuine? Well, sorry, but I don't want to live in that country.

It fired me up when I saw it. If all you are hearing is the media spin, then I'm sorry. But watch the whole speech for yourself, judge for yourself. Watch espescially to the end--when Dean actually talks about fighting, and listen to what he's fighting for.

That's why I want to fight with him--I want my country back.

I'm originally from Cincinnati

I say that because, if you were in the greater Cincinnati area for much of the last thirty years or so, your sports teams have pretty much always let you down.

Except for a good run in the 70s for the Reds (plus a WS sweep in 1991(?)), and an occasional above-500 season for the Bengals, life was bleak for a sports fan in the Tri-State.  Sure, Xavier and UC could occasionally be expected to hit the NCAA, but it's the pros, you know, that make or break a town's spirit.

Perhaps this is why I have never liked sports.  Perhaps it's why my dad and I don't have much in common.  Perhaps it's why I rarely use sports anolgies in my writing.  In any case, the past day or so has reminded me of nothing so much as it has the first game of any given season in Cincinnati sports.

The Reds (Bengals, Bearcats, Musketeers, whoever) would lose the first game.  My dad, in disgust, would turn off the TV, get up from the easy chair, and wander off to the kitchen with a resigned, "Season's over for the Reds."  (Or whoever.)

Cincinnatians are kind of inured to being losers.  We have grown to expect it, and to be surprised when we aren't.  But always, without fail, at the first sign of weakness, we walk away certain of defeat.

The lesson, of course, is that one game does not a season make.  One loss does not a losing season guarantee.  This is a season we must not lose, and starting your resignated complacency now is unacceptable.

As for me, I am subdued today but very pleased:  We turned out a record number of Democrats last night.  Period.  Defeatist talk doesn't help the team win any games, people.

Iowa over; it ain't so bad for us Dean supporters

It's like getting the first ding in the bumper of your new car. You know, you were on eggshells before, and extra nervous about anything going wrong.

At some point, though, you accumulate so many dings and scratches that you can fly around the parking lot now with abandon.

Most of my Iowa analysis will be at Open Source Politics in the morning (hey, whaddya know, it's up there now!). The Dean-specific spin, though, I'll mention here.

This is, believe it or not, good for us. Dean was strongest when he was the underdog. When we all believed in him against the odds. This moment will, I hope, return some of the humilty we felt when poll after poll showed Dean an asterisk, an also-ran. But it should also bring back the energy we felt when we knew we had something to prove.

Let's remember the positives. 3,500 people from everywhere showed up to the middle of nowhere for a reason, folks: This campaign. That says something. It obviously doesn't say this thing will be a cakewalk--which is what I was hoping, for a while, it would say--but it's real and meaningful.

And we still have the only truly nation-wide campaign. We now have a sense of what worked and what didn't in the first caucus state, so that we'll be able to put up the best organization and fight in NM, ND, MI, WA, ME, DC, ID, and UT, which we should own.

Think about Kerry and Edwards: Where do they go now? Kerry has got nothing beyond New Hampshire; Edwards is looking at South Carolina and then . . . nothing. Clark is now in a much weaker position, not only because he lacks that caucus experience, but because Kerry and Edwards now threaten him in NH and SC. And I predict Dean will maintain his position at first or second in every state now through Feb. 17, when he wins Wicsonsin with 65% of the vote (that's my own personal mission).

But the biggest hopeful sign about this whole thing is the turnout tonight in Iowa. As it turns out (no pun intended), when I've been saying on occasion that 125,000 is the record turnout from 1988, that's just an overreported error. 1988 featured closer to 95,000 Iowans caucusing. 2000 had only 68,000. Tonight, we saw at least 100,000 people, maybe as many 125,000, and nearly half of them were new caucusers. It's that number that should be putting the fear of Jeebus in KKKarl Rove and the gang. It shows that, despite the squabbling and the fighting and the jostling for the nomination, Democrats will not sit idly by this time around. We will take our country back, whoever heads the ticket.

T minus 12 hours

So I didn't get to go to Iowa. I wanted to, sure, but in the end I have too much crap to deal with here at home. And I need to be well rested this week for a fight of a different nature, and that means getting home in the wee hours of Tuesday morning is not an option.

Anyway, I just wanted to make sure my predictions were out there. For the final count--not the initial count at the door, but once the delegates have been divvied up in the ~2000 Iowa precincts tonight--I predict the following totals:
  Dean      28%
  Gephardt  26%
  Kerry     19%
  Edwards   13%
  Kucinich  1%
  Uncommitted 13%
In the end, Gephardt's organization will keep him in the running, and I'm pretty sure that he and Dean will be the only two to reach the 15% viability threshold in every precinct. That means Edwards, Kerry, and Kucinich (I don't think Sharpton, Lieberman, or Clark will make 15% anywhere) will have precincts where their final count is zero, dropping their overall percentages.

I predict turnout will be about 125,000--nearly double 2000's 68,000 total.

Finally, don't miss my post-Iowa commentary (as part of the "Boston Bound" series at Open Source Politics tomorrow morning.

[Post-game Update: Boy, was I wrong! Mmmmm, them eggs is good, even if they was on my face! I may have hit turnout right, though.]

Thursday Clarke Update

One of these days I'll get back to my usual pathetic rants. Anyway, Bobot will not go to the state elections commission.

That means Sheriff David Clarke will stay on the ballot for the Milwaukee mayoral primary.

So here's the deal: We have a front-runner, or at least a near front-runner, who a month ago boasted that he'd collected 5,000 signatures, well over the minimum (1500) and even beyond the maximum allowable (3000). But when the time came to perform, he could just barely produce.

Even worse, it's becoming increasingly clear that Clarke has no actual support from non-hypothetical Milwaukeeans:

Most of Clarke's signatures were obtained by people who didn't live in the city. [. . .] While it's true that the vast majority of Clarke nomination papers were circulated by people not living in the city, by far the most signatures collected were by Clarke Field Director Kirk Fedewa, who lives in New Berlin and is on the campaign payroll. The second most were collected by Menomonee Falls resident and campaign operative Lisa Sanfilippo. Even key Clarke campaign adviser Michael Whitcomb, who lives in Brookfield, got into circulating nomination papers, collecting 83 signatures the last two days before the deadline.

The big money for Clarke is rumored to come from out-of-state GOP machines. This week, Republican JC Watts was in town in support of Clarke.

I mean, I think everyone should have known something was up when Clarke invited the man who ran the Brewers into the ground to be a financial advisor on his campaign.

If not for the constant pimping by a certain uber-conservative Rushclone talker who shall remain nameless here in town, no one would even be thinking of Clarke as a viable candidate. And now, with an absolutely disastrous debacle here at the front of his campaign, it is clear that Clarke cannot lead. Period.

David Clarke Update, Tuesday Evening

He's in, pending the Bobot challenge. The Milwaukee election people counted a total of 1539, 39 over the minimum, after deciding on 1451 last night but agreeing to take affidavits as to the validity of additional signatures.

Either side can appeal whatever the final decision is to the state elections commission, which then has ten days to rule on the matter. By my count, that could be as late as just three weeks before the February 17 primary.

As I've said, Bobot is not at all my dog in this fight, but, go, Vince, go! If Clarke can't even hold his organization together enough to gather 1500 good signatures in a city of 600,000 people, then he has proven incapable of governing us.

WEDNESDAY MORNING UPDATE: Apparently after I went to bed last night, Bobot's challenge succeeded in only squelching 20 names. The link above is updated to the new article with the correct figures, as the old one was pulled in favor of this one. The Wisconsin Elections Board will likely get the case today. And they drew for ballot order: Clark is eighth of ten. Former police chief Art Jones is last. That sounds about right.

David Clarke Update, Tuesday Morning

Last night Milwaukee election officials finished a review of Clarke's ballot petition signatures (see the entry just below this one for the backstory) and came up with just 1451 valid signatures. Candidates need 1500 to get on the ballot. But the battle is not over; a hearing today will decide if he gets on the ballot or not. As the paper this morning notes,

[A]ttorneys for Clarke will have to persuade the Election Commission to allow dozens of signatures to be added to the tally, arguing that the flaws are technical ones. [. . .] But either side could appeal the determination--sending the issue to the state Elections Board and possibly the courts at a critical period in the suddenly shaken-up contest.

The city folks will make their final call tonight (while I'm busy watching the polls in DC), and I will have an update either late tonight or in the morning. In the meantime, my fingers are crossed that Clarke is out. He'd be bad for the city, for the schools, and for our image--especially now that he's shown he has no idea how the city works and no control over the people who work for him.

The other candidate Clarke

I haven't been writing much about the mayor's race here in Milwaukee, since my massive national audience probably doesn't have much interest in some paltry little provincial contest.

But it's really been quite, um, interesting

Milwaukee is chary with its mayors. John Norquist, who left office at the end of December to head up the Congress for New Urbanism, was elected first way back in 1988. Before that, Henry Maier had been mayor since--get this--1960.

Anyway, Norquist announced a long time ago that he would not be running for re-election, even before he was tapped to lead the CNU. In other words, no incumbent for the first time in 15 years. And nature abhors a vacuum, right? So roughly six billion Milwaukeeans queued up for the non-partisan race, including some heavy hitters like former US Rep. Tom Barrett, beloved state Rep. Pedro Colon (who has sense pulled out and endorsed Barrett), Common Council President Marvin Pratt (who moved into the mayor's office when Norquist left, so he is kind of the incumbent), and Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke. In all, nearly two dozen made some effort, and ten submitted signatures, which were due this past week, to get on the ballot.

Now, the odyssey of this candidate Clarke is similar to the odyssey that other candidate Clark, the presidential Wesley.

David Clarke has not been a very political figure, the same way Wes Clark is debuting in politics in the presidential race. Clarke-with-an-e ran as a Democrat in 2002 for County Sheriff, though lately it's become clear that he is very Republican. In fact, former Rep. J. C. Watts (R-OK) will be in town Tuesday for a big Clarke fundraiser. Clark-without-an-e has generated some controversy for having admitted to voting for Nixon, Reagan, and the first Bush, as well as for not having officially declared himself a Democrat until after declaring as a candidate for the party's nomination.

The eeriest thing, probably, is the way both Clarke and Clark dilly-dallied leading up to the race. Both waited until the field was fairly well set before making their decisions to enter, leading to all kinds of speculation and, to an extent, chaos. Now both have climbed to be the likely second-place candidate at this point (Clarke behind Barrett, and Clark behind Howard Dean).

But now one of the two--Clarke-with-an-e--may find his candidacy cut short. When his team filed signatures this week, they just barely submitted the required number to make the ballot. He needed 1500, and he got 1532. And that's only because a staffer stood in the lobby of City Hall desperately working the cell phone to get circulators in with their papers the day they were due. Problem is, many of the signatures will likely be declared invalid.

Vince Bobot, a former prosecutor and municipal court judge, has challenged Clarke's papers. Now, I carry no water for Bobot--don't like him one bit, really, but I like Clarke less. If Bobot can get Clarke off the ballot, I will be quite pleased.

Personally, I've become quite the fan of Leon Todd. For a while I flirted with Sandy Folaron, but I like Todd's approach much better. When I've heard him speak, he just makes sense. He also has a bit of Howard Dean's spunky outrage at how things could have been left to deteriorate to the state they are in. Even when I disagree with Todd--for example, on the Milwaukee Public Schools teacher residency requirement--he explains his position in such a way that it makes sense why he stands where he stands. And I like that.

But I digress.

By Tuesday--the day of the big J. C. Watts fundraiser--the Milwaukee election folks will make a decision on the Clarke signatures. He's got a razor-thin margin of error: If they find just 33 questionable signatures, he's out. The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel says that they've found 34 questionable signatures. Bobot, of course, is convinced there are many more than that. There is the outside chance that additional signatures could be counted if circulators are allowed to swear out affidavits. That would lead to all kinds of lawsuits, I tell you what.

I'll post an update Tuesday, for those interested. But this is shaping up to be an interesting thing.

Oh, I'll add one last bit of fun. The date of our mayoral primary (the top two will square off later) is the same date as our presidential primary: February 17, just four weeks away.

Folkbum on Radio, Part Deux

A few weeks back I mentioned in passing how impressed I was with the Kucinich folks' organizing, as I had heard them blow out the competition in a Wisconsin Public Radio straw poll. (That got notice on at least one DK mailing list--that a "Deanie" was impressed with them.)

Well, WPR did another straw poll today, and, as I was able to get home before the end of the program, I was able to call in for Dean this time. (I am a Selective Luddite: sure, I'm writing this on my wireless laptop while watching my TiVo, but I refuse to get a cell phone.)

Anyway, the final results:

Howard Dean 25 (39%)
Wesley Clark 18 (28%)
Dennis Kucinich 17 (27%)
Carol Moseley Braun 3 (7%)
Dick Gephardt 1 (2%)
John Edwards 0 (0%)
John Kerry 0 (0%)
Al Sharpton 0 (0%)
Joe Lieberman -1 (-2%)

Yes, one woman called in and specifically voted against Lieberman. So, even when the "Sharpton Line" is 0, Lieberman can be under it.

An additional shout-out to my friends Mike in Tosa and Tim in Marinette who got on. If anyone else made it, lemme know. I didn't hear the whole hour.

Blogger is Bloggered

I guess it's been happening to a number of people for the better part of a week, according to other Blogger users out there I've read, but it's just started happening to me today: I can't get to any blog*spot or Blogger sites, and instead get re-directed to new.blogger.com. I can't even look at my own blog! If any of you out there are still able to get here (and my hit counter says y'all are trying), good for you. Me, I'm blind.

I can't even get a whole-blog preview while I'm editing in Blogger.

The blog*spot and Blogger people need to get this figured out ASAP. Man, if I was paying for the premium service I'd be really mad. As it is, my indignation is tempered by the fact that I haven't had to pay for anything yet. Sigh.

Folkbum's official 2004 Resolutions

I doth forthwith hereby and duly resolve to

• Eat more vegetables
• Eat less pizza
• Read more books, especially fiction, which has gotten the short-shrift from me lately
• Post here more often
• Post to OSP more often
• Not go postal
• Take a real vacation
• Watch more independent movies (especially those bizarre Australian comedies)
• Buy more CDs and see more live music
• Write at least one good song a month--I've been putting a lot of ideas off for too long
• Deliver Wisconsin for Howard Dean on Feb 17, and the Democrat (whom I hope will be Dean) in November
• Get more sleep
• Herd more sheep
• Eat no Peeps
• Continue to live without a cell phone
• Stop making specific promises about what I will post here and when, and then stop using Blogger's back-dating function to make it look like I really posted it on time

Folkbum's Official 2004 Predictions
the things that turn out wrong are due to the medication

Pop Culture:
The real Michael Jackson will be found working in an auto chassis factory in Michigan, and the cyborg we think of as MJ will be humanely destroyed by prosecutors in what is almost, but technically not, the first televised execution.

Lord of the Rings: Return of the King loses the Best Picture Oscar to Bad Santa.

NBC launches "Law & Order: K-9," featuring the voice of Marv Albert as the talking dog.

Simon from "American Idol" and Vern from "Trading Spaces" are the first ones voted off the island.

In an attempt to top 2003's Brittney-kisses-Madonna stunt, the 2004 MTV Music Video Awards features people who actually like music getting screwed.

Politics
George W. Bush, in a move that surprises evryone, replaces himself at the top of the ticket with an infinite number of monkeys at an infinite number of typewriters. "Hey," he says by way of explanation, "these guys wrote Shakespeare."

Howard Dean wins the 2004 Democratic nomination, but only after he bests everyone else in the Thunderdome.

In California, newly elected governor Arnold Schwartzenegger resigns amid controversy after Maria publishes a tell-all memoir entitled He Groped What?

The anthrax killer, the Plame leaker, and Osama bin Laden are all caught, finally, by the A-Team.

The US Supreme Court faces its toughest case ever, when they agree to hear Spy v. Spy.

World Events
Terrorists strike somewhere, with some casualties.

Ariel Sharon reveals that the wall he's building to separate Israelis and Palestinians is really just his attempt at getting Roger Waters to re-unite with the rest of Pink Floyd for a concert of The Wall. It works initially, but halfway through "Bring the Boys Back Home" David Gilmour whacks Roger in the head with his strat, rendering him unconscious.

China sends up four more manned space missions, including one in September that docks at the International Space Station, where the Chinese pilot beats the US astronaut at weightless ping-pong.

Folkbum's Personal Life
After gaining fame and fortune as the key player in Dean's WI election victory, your humble folkbum is signed to a multi-record deal with, oh, let's say, Philo-Rounder (they do Good Things), and wins Teacher of the Year.

On the down side, Dean overlooks him for the cabinet. Sigh.

Tomorrow: Resolutions.

Sounds of silence

You may or may not have noticed, but MP3.com has shut down. C|Net bought them out, and supposedly C|Net's working on a music download service that will be running sometime in the future. In the meantime, most of my on-line music is now unavailable. However, you can still download "I Hate to Disappoint You" from amazon.com, and a live version of "The War Game" from New Songs for Peace. (While you're at NSfP, check out my friend Jym Mooney's excellent "I Have Come to Take my Boy Home.")

When C|Net gets its service up, I may make more songs available again. Of course, you could always write and offer to buy a CD chock-full of songs that aren't all bad. Ten bucks is the usual price, but you never know how low I might go to get rid of these things.

Folkbum at rest

The flu has struck the folkbum household. Even my knuckles ache.

So, with holidays, recovery, and such, blogging is/ has been/ will be light.

From my outbox

From: folkbum
Date: Mon Dec 22, 2003 10:40:51 PM America/Chicago
To: Jonathan Chait < deanophobe@tnr.com >
Subject: Worst. Idea. Ever.

Mr. Chait:

How can you possibly believe that the best way to ensure that Democrats can beat Bush in November is to spend your time denigrating the man with, it seems from this vantage point, the best shot at being the one to face him?

I wouldn't want you to set aside your principles (if you have any; it's hard to tell) or compromise your integrity (see previous parens), but it seems to me that a more valuable use of your blogging time might be one of the following:

1. Exposing Bush for what he is--a lying bastard with no business in the White House;
2. Promoting the other Democratic contenders instead of tearing down the one you dislike; or
3. Doing pretty much anything else.

Not one vote has yet been cast, of course, so there is no sense in running around asking people to "fall in line." But understand this: Bush is strong (see today's post of yours--you never do say why Bush is successful, leading me to think you may not know!) because he enjoys stronger solidarity among Republican voters than his father, for example. Democrats couldn't hold the coalition in 2000--discounting a popular-vote win--for if the Nader voters had allied with instead of against us, we would have won New Hampshire and Florida, and we'd be talking right now about how to re-elect president Gore.

In other words, you're part of the problem. You sow disunity and dissention when within a few short months we must, absolutely must, present a united front.

Ann Coulter has a word for people like you, which, I expect, she has probably called you many times. In this case, I concur, for your politics of destruction--self-destruction, at that--are nothing short of traitorous.

(NB to my readers: I refuse to link to Chait's Dean-o-phobe blog, though I'm thinking of doing a point-by-point rebuttal of an entry or two of his later this week.)

UPDATE, 12/23: cynic has started the Chait-o-Phobe response site. Check it out.

DefCon: Ernie

(If you don't get the joke, check the right column.)

Tom Ridge came out of his hole yesterday to tell us there would be six more weeks of winter is an increased threat level of terrorism on US soil. Nothing to kill the holiday spirit like a hefty dose of irrational panic, no? And I wonder who's getting duct tape and plastic sheeting in their stockings this Christmas?

The most damaging effect of this elevated terror alert will be further depletion of state and municipal budgets. Even though Homeland Security is slated to reimburse local agencies for additional costs incurred (because the feds have so much money!), short term, cities, couties, and states will be faced with a tab that they cannot pick up. Just think of the holiday overtime, for example.

It's not that I don't think that there may be a threat of terrorism or that I don't want everyone at home and abroad to be safe. It just seems like there has got to be a better way, something that involves not so much panic and "threat levels" here at home, but concerted efforts at cultivating and using allies to help us find and dismantle terrorist networks here and abroad. Attacking Iraq and capturing Saddam Hussein has not made us safer (and that's not just me talking). Treating this like a holy war has not made us safer (remember that Ashcroft, Ridge, and the Whopper only tout busts of terrorists if they are not Christian). Reelecting the Whopper in 2004 will not make us safer.

I want my country back.

Folkbum on Radio

Teachers Speak Out, the grass-rootsy group of Milwaukee Public Schools teachers I am a part of, will be making our public debut this weekend for anyone in Southeastern Wisconsin. A few of us will be appearing on Dave Melnick's show in 620 WTMJ radio from 11 AM to 1 PM. It's a call-in, so if you would like to talk live and in person to your humble Folkbum about the issues surrounding the public schools in Milwaukee, you can. (There is no web-cast available, sorry!)

For the uninitiated, Dave is the voice of the left, or at least of reason, on WTMJ's talk radio (owned by the same company that owns the daily paper and the NBC affiliate in town), relegated to the Sunday 11-3 slot, unless there's a Packers game on. In the meantime, eight or ten hours a day during the station has right-wing Rushclones who hate teachers.

This is probably the last time I will mention TSO and our work here on this blog, since I do want to keep the inherently political stuff separate from the work I want to do for teachers. But you can bookmark the TSO site to keep up with that kind of thing over there.

Old Friends and New Pages

Fellow Milwaukee Dean Supporters--

When ten other people and I gathered at Alterra Coffee the first Wednesday of March to talk about this Howard Dean fellow we'd become enamored of, I had no idea how that we would come this far. I had hopes sure, but I never imagined that, at the moment when the Iowa caucuses are just a month away, you and I and everyone I've met along the way would be a part of a real revolution in American politics. The tea is in the harbor, folks, and I'd like to think we're all responsible for at least a few leaves.

In the intervening months, I took on a number of responsibilities with this group, going so far as to call myself--at the urging of others--the coordinator of our, at the time, rag-tag band of Dean supporters. But it has been a while since I posted to this group at all, and even longer since I've done any real coordinating.

Since August, with the arrival of Mike Tate and Meagan Mahaffey in Milwaukee, not to mention the new school year starting for me (I am a teacher), the Dean campaign has had an official presence in town. In addition, many other great people have taken on tremendous responsibility in coordinating and hosting activities around town.

And, hey, now that Al Gore's on board, you really don't need me at all! :)

But another reason I have been away from the campaign these past few months is that I am attempting to put together a new grass-roots coalition here in Milwaukee. As you know, the Dean campaign has probably done more to revive the grassroots in this country than even a strong dose of Miracle Gro could. I have taken those lessons in grassroots organizing, and, in concert with some other Milwaukee Public Schools teachers, have put together a group that will try to provide a positive voice for public school teachers in Milwaukee. We are in the midst of contract-negotiating time, and, as you know if you've been reading the Journal Sentinel or (shudder) listening to Charlie Sykes, teachers and our union are being demonized, painted as the enemy. Teachers Speak Out, the name of our group, is going to try, grassroots-style, to change that.

So, I have not abandoned Dean. I will be Meeting Up, phone-banking when I can, and GOTVing as much as possible in both February and November. But I may seem a little pre-occupied with my other projects. And I do want to be thank all of you for your help and your, more importantly, your inspiration. If I tried to name you all, I would miss someone, I'm sure. I will see you on the campaign trail--

It's October Already?

I'm not a warblogger, never have been, never wanted to be. But today's capture of Osama bin Laden the anthrax killer Saddam Hussein is really, really big news, even if they didn't save it for the "October Surprise."

My guy Dean's response was out earlier this morning:

Statement by Governor Dean on the Capture of Saddam Hussein

WEST PALM BEACH-- Governor Dean issued the following statement this morning:

"This is a great day for the Iraqi people, the US, and the international community.

"Our troops are to be congratulated on carrying out this mission with the skill and dedication we have come to know of them.

"This development provides an enormous opportunity to set a new course and take the American label off the war. We must do everything possible to bring the UN, NATO, and other members of the international community back into this effort.

"Now that the dictator is captured, we must also accelerate the transition from occupation to full Iraqi sovereignty."

I think Dean's response hits all the right notes:
• Good troops (not administration of the war)
• Good for Iraqis (not Bush's re-election)
• Get US troops out and international forces in now, and end the occupation

And I think we have to face it: The only one who gets a bump in poll numbers now is Bush. Those great polls showing him at under 50% for re-elect? We won't see those again for some time.

I also don't think we're going to see an end to violence in Iraq, since I have a hard time believing we're under attack from Saddam loyalists. I think we're mostly facing Iraqi resistance to the American occupation, and as long as we are there our troops will die needlessly.

Unelectable

As much as I think that electability arguments are a losing game, I would like to point out that we're in the process of gaming the system for a new Google Bomb: We want to make sure that unelectable gets into the works at Google, too.

It's also not a bad idea to try linking Bush inauguration, Bush inaugural, Bush inaugural address, and Bush inauguration speech, to that great Onion article, "Bush: 'Our Long National Nightmare Of Peace And Prosperity Is Finally Over.'" (Idea from KarMann/ John.)

New York Times: Folkbum is right

A while back I had a nice long post, "Electoral Math is for Losers" (read it with comments over at dKos), in which I wrote

You may believe that the election will be decided in just a few key battleground states and you may want to bother over which candidate you think has a better shot in those few key battleground states.  But that's not what I want.  I want a candidate who campaigns to win the election, not a candidate who campaigns to win, say, Tennessee.

When we start talking about who looks good in the South, or who looks good in the Midwest, or who looks good in whatever pet state you think will be the deciding one in 2004, we lose sight of the big picture.  We are in this election as Democrats, and we will win as Democrats.  We are not the party of one region or another.  We are not the party of one group or another.  We represent the majority view on every major domestic issue in the country, and it's time to win--and win the whole country.  I don't want to hear about how one guy will win one state.  That's loser talk.  I want to hear about how we will win period in 2004.

Well, New York Times columnist Bob Herbert seems to agree. Among other great points about November 2004, he writes

The Democratic Party's circular firing squad has assembled. Everybody's angry with everybody else. [. . . T]he Democrats need more than a candidate or two. The party needs a plan. It needs a coherent, compelling, convincing narrative that shows how voters and the nation would be better off under Dr. Dean or General Clark or Dick Gephardt--take your pick--than they are now.

To regain control of the White House, the Democrats need to give voters, who are frightened by terrorism and disoriented by the pace of 21st-century events, new reasons to hope. That can only be done by a thoughtful, united, energized and creative party. A party with a plan and a ferocious will to win.

It's nice to be vindicated by the Gray Lady, I guess, but it does make me wonder why this whole thing hasn't sunk in with everybody else yet. It's not a matter of trying to win one state or another, or having the most "electable" guy (sorry, Moseley Braunatics). It's a matter of wanting it, wanting it bad, and working for it. What's so hard about that? What's not to get? Can anybody explain it?

Help me stop the end of the world

Take Ralph Nader's survey. Tell him no, in every way possible. Thank you.

A Must Read

I so seldom just point to other blogs and say "Go read" (except OSP ;) ), but when I do, do I ever steer you wrong? Cowboy Kahlil has one final post at his blog (he's moving to a new host eventually), and it's called 50 reasons to elect Howard Dean. Go read.

Goodbye, Bow Tie

Former Senator Paul Simon, and recent Howard Dean-endorser, died today after his heart surgery yesterday. I always liked him, and I know he was very well respected among the Illinoisites. Condolences to his family and friends.

And I was really looking forward to seeing that bow tie with Howard Dean on the campaign trail this summer.

POTUS Poll

I've said just about all I have to say about the Gore thing at OSP.

So today, instead, I'm pleading for some more of us Dean supporters to freep the POTUS Poll (I'm talking to you, Al!). The poll is run by folks who support Instant Runoff Voting. The Kucinich people have got this thing locked down, it seems, despite what one would think would be Dean's overwhelming netroots.

Email everyone you know. We need to take this puppy back.

(As an aside, I am constantly amazed at Kucinich supporters' organization. As much as people talk about Dean's and Clark's machines being excellent, the DKers are almost LaRouche-like in their tenacity. I heard a Wisconsin Public Radio phone-in straw poll one day recently where Kucinich probably won 2-1 over Dean. That takes discipline and real organization. Too bad it doesn't take many live voters.)

Blogonym

I'm really surpised no one is using this, but I haven't seen it anywhere else and the only Google entry for it comes from an OSP article of mine.

Well, I hereby stake claim to this coinage, and would like the world of neologisms to take note:

BLOGONYM (blog´ • o • nim) n. The pseudonym adopted by one who writes a web log (a web blogger, or blogger) who wishes to remain anonymous. This blogger's blogonym is "folkbum."

Paranoia strikes you deep

Here's one to keep you up at night. John Williams at Open Source Politics asks the very simple question: Do you want your vote to count? The article contains a link to a voting "machine" he programmed that, surprise surprise, may not actually count your vote correctly.

You might think I'm crazy


Which Historical Lunatic Are You?
From the fecund loins of Rum and Monkey.

Via NTodd

Electoral Math is for Losers

Steve Gilliard used to say that all the time, that electoral math is for losers. He got a lot of people all het up about it, too. But the more I see Democrats--good, solid, thoughtful, intelligent, all-on-the-same-side Democrats--carefully crafting arguments around which candidate to support (or not) in the primaries based on "electability" and the vagaries of the Electoral College, the more convinced I am that Gilliard is right: This gets us nowhere and serves to do nothing but sow dissension among us.

I should be clear: I'm not calling all those who fiddle with electoral maps and count the electors on their fingers and toes losers. When I say that electoral math is for losers, I mean that counting electors is, ultimately, a losing strategy. I'll elaborate in a moment.

Am I defensive? I mean, after all, most of the people spelling out electability issues or predicting Electoral College doom are doing so to argue against Howard Dean. I am, it is well known in these parts, a long-time Dean supporter. So, then, is it just a reflex mechanism on my part to say that only a loser would argue against Howard Dean based on electoral math? I don't think so. I firmly believe that a bean-counter approach to 2004 is ultimately the worst strategy we can take (no offense to bean counters in the audience).

First of all, electability is a canard. We are a full year, basically, away from November 2004. George W. Bush is consistently at or below the level of "generic Democrat" in head-to-head polls. Yet most candidates most of the time fall behind Bush in head-to-heads. Sure, there's a state poll here and there showing some candidates up and some down, or a national poll every once in a while with one guy up over the others. But in the end, if we're looking just at the polling data from today, the Democrats all have roughly equal shots if you average the polls, and the Democrats, with an unnamed candidate, have an excellent outlook in general.

But when people talk about Howard Dean's unelectability--or, for that matter, any Democrat's--the polls are secondary. It's all about personality. Dean's too angry. Dean's (perceived as) too liberal. Dean's too gruff. Contrariwise, Clark's too militaristic to attract former Greens; Kerry's too lackluster; Gephardt's too old-school; Edwards is too young. And so on. For the most part, there is nothing objective in these elecability arguments.

What really sticks in my craw, though, is the unspoken but ever-present sense among the Democrats making these electability claims that one candidate or another (usually, again, Howard Dean) will not have the full support of the Democratic Party--or at least some Democratic voters. This is bad voodoo, my friends. Look, I'm hip-deep in the Dean campaign. I have as much invested in this as anyone. And yet, if Dean is not the nominee, I have no intention of just walking away, or of only giving lackluster support to the nominee. Why? Because Democrats must win next November.

I put that in italics so there would be no question where my loyalty lies. I want Bush out of Washington. Period. I don't care if the Democrats nominate a limp rag, I will bust my hump going door-to-door for that scrappy little rag. And face it: With about a bazillion dollars to spend next year, the Bush campaign will be hard for any Democrat to beat without all of us working hard for victory. If all you plan to do is sit on your butt if your guy doesn't win, then I don't want to read your whining about how all of the other guys can't win.

Now about that pesky Electoral College thing. You and I both know that the only thing that guarantees a win in 2004 is 270 or more electoral votes. So why, then, do I think all of this electoral math is for losers? Simple: Did you ever notice how southerners get upset whenever anyone reminds us that we don't need the South to win? You and I both know that there is very little chance that the Democrat will win Mississippi. But if all goes according to plan, our guy will be the president in Mississippi just as he will be the president in Massachusetts. And we cannot campaign nor can we act as though the South is not a part of this country or a part of this race. (Plenty of other states or regions can be substituted in the preceding without changing a thing.)

You may believe that the election will be decided in just a few key battleground states and you may want to bother over which candidate you think has a better shot in those few key battleground states. But that's not what I want. I want a candidate who campaigns to win the election, not a candidate who campaigns to win, say, Tennessee.

When we start talking about who looks good in the South, or who looks good in the Midwest, or who looks good in whatever pet state you think will be the deciding one in 2004, we lose sight of the big picture. We are in this election as Democrats, and we will win as Democrats. We are not the party of one region or another. We are not the party of one group or another. We represent the majority view on every major domestic issue in the country, and it's time to win--and win the whole country. I don't want to hear about how one guy will win one state. That's loser talk. I want to hear about how we will win period in 2004.

So don't show me your electoral math. Don't complain about some candidate's personality and call it electability. Instead tell me how we're gonna win. That's the talk of winners.

Louise the Rabbit
1994(?)-November 24, 2003

'Mid brown castor fur
A little pink tongue darted.
She licked everything.

Rest in peace, little rabbit girl.

UPDATE: Thanks to all leaving condolences, and to NTodd for directing you all here. If you so choose, in memorium you can make a donation to the House Rabbit Society.

The Cake has now been Taken

I got found yesterday on Google with the search string (I shudder to type this) "Aaron Carter armpits" (somehow I was in the top ten).

I think in the last couple weeks I set a pretty high standard, what with that posting once, sometimes twice a day. I should have saved them all up and spread them out; I have some guilt now because the last week has been dry around here.

I'm working on a write-up of my visit with way-cool Wisconsin state superintendent Elizabeth Burmaster last Friday. This past week has also been NCLB testing week, and I'd like to get some thoughts down about how all that went (like you don't know what I'm going to say already!). Tonight I have tickets to a house concert with Cosy Sheridan, so those posts probably won't be until next week.

Fun with free image hosts

Maggie:

Howard Dean:

The interview that led to my appearance in USA Today (I'm the one who doesn't look like Jill Lawrence):

All pictures by Mrs. Folkbum Sarah ("I'm not Mrs. anybody!"), who famously gets forgotten for her photos. There's a story in that for later.

Okay, I'm giving up the themed post titles

It was fun while it lasted, but I'm moving on. Anyway, no big news to report.

Oh, there was an eclipse.

And Howard Dean has rejected matching funds at the request of 85% of the people who voted in his "poll." The most telling bit of news: "During the two-day vote, supporters of the campaign pledged or contributed over $5.3 million with an average contribution or pledge of $116.89." So, going into the vote, word in the street was that Dean had already topped $5m in contributions for the quarter. Add to it this $5.3m, and Dean's at over $10m for the quarter with 60% of the quarter left to go. At this rate, he will raise $25m easy for the quarter. Ouch.

Here's an interesting one on the likely AFSCME endorsement, too. Every week, National Journal runs a "Democratic Insider" poll to find out who "insiders" think will win the nomination (I found it through Political Wire). For the three weeks that they have run this poll, Howard Dean has won it. I noticed this week, among the list of "insiders," this bit: "INSIDERS (candidate affiliation or endorsement, if any): [. . .] Gerald McEntee [. . .]." Gerry McEntee, of course, is the president of AFSCME. I would have loved to have been in the room to hear what McEntee said as an "insider" and why!

"Boston Bound" is done at OSP, with Howard Dean and a bonus edition of predictions.

You can try again, it might work next time

I've mentioned the odd Googling that happens to get people here. Today it was from the German version of Google: "Das Web wurde nach Mousepads mit Winnie Puh durchsucht.  Ergebnisse 1 - 3 von ungefähr 5. Suchdauer: 0.30 Sekunden." I was number two on the list.

I guess Google in Germany is a lot like Google here. It turns out that when you suche das Web with common words, it exludes them: "'mit' ist ein sehr häufiges Wort und wurde in der Suchanfrage ignoriert."

I have to say that Suchanfrage is my new favorite word. (For a long time, my favorite word was fardel, which you can find most famously in Hamlet's "To be or not to be" speech.)

Oh, and OSP has part five of my "Boston Bound" series up, on Dick Gephardt.

And the only friend you can reach isn't a good friend at all

Let me take a moment to thank Joe Lieberman for doing something right in this campaign. Notice that his name is missing from this sentence:

Gephardt, Clark and Kerry are working together once again to try and stop an endorsement.

And how about this whole SEIU plus AFSCME deal? Is that just mind-blowing or what? I was, in fact, going to title this post "Holy Fucking Shit," but then I thought the Dar Williams fans would get confused.

[UPDATE: Alert (and nit-picky :) ) reader Jeremy points out that Wesley Clark is not involved (it is Edwards instead) in the behind-the-scenes politicking to stop the endorsements for Dean. I didn't leave Clark out for nefarious reasons; I just thought the joke was funnier with Lieberman.]

Even after the anger, it all turned silent

Untelevised seems to be missing. Does everyone else see just a blank screen? Where are you, Matt?

And I look out and say, "Yeah, she's really blonde"
bonus headline!

And at OSP, Kenneth Q. takes on the monumental task of refuting Ann Coulter. Godspeed, man.

Tonight I went running through the screen doors of discretion

Howard Dean is taking the populist thing in every direction possible, no? Now, he wants us to decide if he should abandon public financing in the primary:

I am writing to place the most important decision of this campaign in your hands. We need to choose whether we will decline federal matching funds or accept them. [. . .] This decision is no longer mine to make. This is a campaign of the people, by the people and for the people. Your successful effort of raising a historic amount of money through small contributions has made this choice possible. This is why I am putting this decision in your hands. I am asking you to vote on what kind of a campaign we will conduct from this point forward. No matter how well intentioned both our options are – the choice is difficult: do we choose option (a) to fund our campaign ourselves and decline matching funds, or do we choose option (b) and accept federal matching funds and the spending limits?

This announcement came early. It was not due to be made until tomorrow. If you want my honest assessment, I think he did it tonight because he got battered in the "Rock the Vote" forum tonight about the confederate flag. (And he lost some esteem in my eyes because he prefers peecees to Macintosh. Sigh.) But now the headlines in the morning will not be about his being battered in the debate, but rather his decision to turn the decision on public financing over to his supporters. Very shrewd.

I don't necessarily think it wise to forego the public financing in the primary--though Dean does make the point that we Dems are dead in tha water until after Boston--but this was a great media move on somebody's part. Dean owns the news cycle for the next week.

Taking out the compost

Go say congrats to another USA Today alum, Candidate's Wife.

(It was tricky finding an appropriate title for this post that matches my theme. But CW is in garbage janitorial supplies, so it works. Kind of. It's not a judgment on CW or her USA Todayness.)

I think magic's in the learning

Blog of a Math Teacher has a question: Teachers, what would it take for you to change what you do in class? Interesting dicussion to follow, I'm sure.

And don't forget to drop by OSP for my Joe Lieberman Boston Bound post. And don't make fun of the logo; our design team didn't come through and I had to do it myself. :(

The child who played with the moon and stars

Congratulations to Mrs. and Mr. Kos on the birth of Aristotle Alberto. Much cooler than NTodd's cat.

If you're gonna get your heart broke, you'd better do it just right

For the Kucinichistas, Sharptonites, and Moseley Braunatics out there, I have a post up at OSP detailing what may be their only hopes for success in the primaries. It's part one in a six-part "Boston Bound" series.

I'm taking a cue from Atrios with the post titles for a little while. The bonus credit is still available for the first enterprising soul to get it!

I have a good, I have an evil



And bonus points if you spot the allusion in the post title!

As cool as I am

I guess the prize for forgetting to submit my votes for the weekly "Best of Blogs" segment of Open Source Politics is that they vote for one of my pieces as one of the best. This week's BoB is "The Best of Us," a collection of good OSP posts from October. My "Wither College Funding?" post from a few weeks back made the cut.

I also recommend Loren Webster's "Goodbye to the Clean Water Act?", Dru Blood's "Why I Homeschool My Children", Patrick Taylor's "The Deportation of Maher Arar", Kenneth Quinnell's "T. Rex's North American Field Guide to Monsters: The Right-Wing Zombie", Barbara O'Brien's "Life, Death, and Politics", and NTodd's "Around the World in 80 Sentences (Or Half That)". The rest of them are just as good; I just don't have time to list them all here.

Go read. Now.

Okay, I feel better now

'Cause the bats are back:


The first 10,000 people to give $31.00 or more get a "Bush Frightens
Me - Vote Dean" button

I've been trolled!

In response to my latest Open Source Politics post, I got a Republican troll in the comments. I never get Republican trolls, not even here! So I'm quite pleased with myself. Here's the comment:

Found this by chance on weblogs. I also watched most of the NOW show--keeping up on the enemy. When asking gov't officials about education, esp. Bush and Paige, remember to also look to the author of the No Child Left Behind Legislation--namely, Ted Kennedy, D-Mass. I am sure there was/is much more that could be done, and I am of the opinion that it was a huge mistake to allow a communist who loves dictators more than his own country (partisan as I am) to write the law that would educate our children, rather than more qualified individuals. This, if anything, is Bush's mistake. As for the NOW gang, if you've watched for any length of time you know the stances they take on most issues--leftest communist are often praised while those that truely love this country are ridiculed. The only real hope we have to educate the children in our country is to disallow any more federal spending on this network (PBS), then take that wasted money, now spent to brainwash good and decent Americans, and apply it to real education.

Posted by Paul at October 28, 2003 05:47 PM

Here's my response.

Thanks for your comment, Paul. I hope some day to be enumerated among your enemies. :)

You make a number of assertions here. I'll not address the PBS stuff, except to say that, even according to your conservative peers' figures, the PBS share of our federal bounty is less than $300 million, which is just a small percentage of the total budget of just my school district, let alone federal funding of education overall. As someone who knows all the Spanish I do from watching "Sesame Street" (agua! uno, do, tres!), I think that the federal money is mui worthwhile.

As to NCLB, you may say that Comrade Ted Kennedy was involved in writing the bill, but believe me, he was not pleased with the entire bill. Education Week, which is not known in teachers'-union circles for being all that sympathetic to our causes, noted that "[t]he final package reflects a political compromise by a range of interests, but embraces many of the president's original proposals unveiled just days after Mr. Bush took office a year ago this month." Yes, there was bi-partisan support for the bill, passing with nearly 90% in congress; but the key parts of the bill, and the ones I as an educator and liberal commentator have biggest problems with, are straight out of Rod Paige's Houston, which "NOW" and many others have fully debunked.

Kennedy was more for the good parts of the bill, which Boehner, Hastert, and the Bush administration had to agree to (the compromise) in order to get Democrats on board with the bill. He was not fully pleased with it, and recognized that a good bill would take continuous fights. The same Ed. Week article notes that

Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass., the chairman of the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, said just before the bill's final Senate passage that major urban areas would see increases of at least 30 percent in Title I aid. Under the fiscal 2002 budget, Boston public schools will get an extra $11 million this year, Los Angeles an extra $87 million, and New York City an additional $143 million, according to preliminary estimates by the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service. High-poverty rural areas will also see significant gains, Sen. Kennedy said.

One key measure excluded from the final deal would have meant even more money for school districts across the country: a plan to shift spending for the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act from the "discretionary" to the "mandatory" side of the federal budget. That proposal would have skirted the annual appropriations process in Congress and locked in years of spending increases for special education. The measure was included in the Senate version of the ESEA, but was removed in the face of staunch opposition from Republicans on the House side of the 39-member conference committee on the ESEA. [. . .]

Mr. Kennedy pointed to provisions in the bill that would expand opportunities for educators' professional development, provide money to help schools reduce class sizes, and expand and strengthen after-school programs. He also said the bill would provide new resources and support for failing schools.

"I regret that we are not going to be able to reach all of the children that could benefit from these kinds of programs," he said. "We will see a significant increase in the resources. [. . .] We're going to have that battle next year, and the year after that. That's the way this process works," Mr. Kennedy said.

Kennedy fought hard for the increases in Title I (and as a teacher at a Title I school, I am glad). Kennedy also fought for full IDEA funding (the feds are supposed to kick in ~30%, but they've been paying ~12%), which would be a tremendous relief to state budgets (in the red everywhere) and urban districts which have proportionally more special education students than wealthier suburban districts. And Democrats have continued to fight for full funding not only of IDEA but NCLB itself. You seem to be in favor of increased funding for education (at least, your call for unfunding PBS points that way), you should spend your time lobbying your congresscritter for full IDEA and NCLB funding instead of calling Bill Moyers a communist.

Today's Reading Assignment

Of course, the readings are all from Open Source Politics. The first is mine, a review of "NOW with Bill Moyers" from a while back all about the "Houston Miracle" and No Child Left Behind.

The second is Natalie Davis writing the post I've thought about on the partial-birth abortion fiasco last week. Kenneth Quinnel looks at another example of Republicans playing doctor with the Terri Schiavo case.

But the cool one is Laura Poyneer's (aka Al-Muhajabah) post explaining Ramadan, the Islamic holiday. Not only is it thorough (when you click through to her FAQ), it's also getting mention at the USA Today webguide! As a USA Today veteran myself, I say welcome to the club, Laura!

I may have another post later today about taxes. Maybe about the primaries. Maybe not until Saturday. I don't know. This week is funny for me. Check back often.

I Know What's Wrong

It's the end of the month and there's no bat.

Plus, it got dark at 4:45.

A Blast from the Past

I posted this in the comments over at NTodd's place, but I realize that I never did post a wrap-up to all the stuff I was into during Howard Dean's Sleepless Summer Tour here on my own blog. So here's one small piece of it. Enjoy.

Did I ever tell you about the time I almost got Jodi Wligoren in trouble with Howard Dean's campaign manager Joe Trippi? The Sleepless Summer tour was literally sleepless for me. And I had a van full of journalists in my power.

I was one of several people drafted to show up at 5:30 the morning after the 9:00 p.m. rally here in Milwaukee to drive the people back from the hotel to the airport (only about a three-minute drive).

Wilgoren was in my van, and after I deposited the press at the airport, she asked me if I could drive her across the way to the Speedway station to see if they had any New York Timeses (it was Sunday morning).

She found three, and then I started back for the hotel, since I knew there would still be people to pick up. She thought I would just take her back to the airport. We had our wires crossed, I guess.

But when I pulled up in front of the hotel, there was no press left (the remainder had all been in the van that left just before we got back). Joe Trippi and whatsisname, the pollster, were standing around with a few other staffers, and Trippi got this what-the-hell-is-a-reporter-doing-here look on his face as we came to a stop. Wligoren, to her credit, and perhaps saving us all, rolled down the van window and said, "Here, Joe. I got you a New York Times."

***

She was not the last press person left, though. As the LAST last van was about to pull off, some guy came flying out of the hotel's front doors, screaming, "Am I too late? They didn't give me my f***ing wake-up call!"

(And, once the press was safely on the plane, I got to drive the Gov. and Kate O'Connor in my Saturn--lucky me for being the only one with an American car!)

Happy "Take Back Your Time Day"

I'll be blogging more about it when I get home from work tonight at 6:30.

I have a new Open Source Politics entry up on the very scary (for people with kids, anyway) report on skyrocketing college tuition. I blame the Republicans. (Bonus points to anyone who recognizes the building in the graphic accompanying that story. Stacie, you're disqualified.)

Also in the past couple of days I had a diary entry make it to the front page of the Daily Kos, generating more comments than any other post over there since Kos's Scoop migration a few weeks back. Now if only that would translate into readership here.

I should plug someone else, so I don't sound too stuck up or nothing. Dru Blood has just about the coolest (and seasonal-holiday-appropriate) blogging pseudonym ever. And her blog is good, too.

Some random questions to keep you entertained

When did purple become a Halloween color? And, for that matter, why is it that now we decorate as much for Halloween as for Christmas? If the amount of Halloween crap on display in my new neighborhood is any indication of what's to come, they will be able to see the Christmas lights from the International Space Station.

What's my list of things for Kevin Drum to do while he's in my native Cincinnati? I'm assuming he doesn't want to visit my parents, so that limits things, as that's pretty much all I usually do there. He can see White Tigers (like the one that ate Roy) at the zoo. And Union Station's fixed up all pretty now. And there's apparently nice new sports stadiums for the Reds and Bengals to lose in. But my advice: Get out now. It worked for me, no?

Have you tooled through my blogroll lately? Lots of relatively new stuff on there.

Anyone want to come to my house and grade papers? I will buy you Krispy Kreme. Swear to Jeebus. (And I have dog training homework to do, too!)

Speaking of new animals, NTodd has a new kitten. Go give him a virtual cigar or something. (Not really a question, I know.)

We should offer condolences to Chicago's Kenn and Boston's Amy for that whole baseball thing. I think Kos was pretty broken up about the Cubs, too, but he has enough traffic already, and a new Scoop-powered blog to keep him busy. (Not really a question, either.)

Identify what's wrong with this sentence, if you can: "COTTON RUGBY SHORTS (For Men and Women): Like the rugged sport they're named after, these robust cotton knit shorts have a 6" inseam."

Are you reading Open Source Politics every day yet? Why not?

Open Thread--Suggestions, Please

I'm going to add another section to the links there on the right. At this point, I've got the shameless self-promotion section, the Howard Dean section, the music links, and the blog links. I'm going to add an education links section, and I'd be interested in your input for what you think belongs in that section. So far, I'm looking at Rethinking Schools, the NEA and the AFT, and the ERIC database. I have a few others I'm considering, and I want to include bloggers who write primarily about education issues. So if you know of any, drop me a line in the comments. And you can talk about anything else that interests you, if you'd rather.

I'm not dead

Though the various viruses (anybody's band need a name?) I've suffered under for the past week and a half are doing their damnedest.

My latest OSP post is on developments in Wesley Clark's campaign (done relatively without bias). The cool part is that Taegan Goddard of Political Wire has picked up on it, and mentions it in the same sentence as two of the three most-read liberal bloggers on the block, Josh Marshall and Kos. Just kind of reinforces the notion that you can't trust anything on the web anymore--you never know what kind of nut is writing it.

Part three of my No Child Left Behind series will be up at OSP this week yet, I swear. Though there's some re-organization going on over there, and the "Knowledge" section is being folded into the "Inside/ Outside" section. So who knows. But you can read parts one and two now if you haven't.

Something Happy

For those of you who thought my earlier post today was too much of a downer (or at least the "I'm having a crappy life, woe is me" part of it), here's some happy news:

If you care (I know you do), four of the top five blogs on The Truth Laid Bear's Ecosystem stats are liberals. For a long time, few if any lefties ranked that high. Help us out, will you, and link to Talking Points, Atrios, Kos, and CalPundit. We still have a ways to go to knock Instapundit out of #1, though. (Notice I didn't link to him--I'm not gonna help his stats!)

Open Source Politics (my moonlighting gig from this blog) has jumped into the top ten as well, at #7, making fully half of the top ten and more than half of the top seven blogs liberal blogs. Yay, us! Note that this is just link-tos, though; OSP's in the low twenties in terms of overall traffic.

Speaking of OSP, Kenneth Quinnell (occasionally known as T. Rex) has a fantastic post up there about all kinds of bad news for conservatives, meaning happy news for us!

Finally, appealing to my softer side, the anonymous (near as I can tell, but I'm a little dim) poster at Blog of a Math Teacher has both linked to my OSP columns on No Child Left Behind and tacitly endorsed Howard Dean. Go give him/ her some needed traffic, positive feedback, and encouragement, because we damn sure need more math teachers!

And I've posted twice in one day. If that's not happy news, I don't know what is.

I'm not buying "Not This War"

I need to blog today. I've had a crappy week, I'm tired, I'm frustrated, and I have mounds of other stuff to do. But I need to blog today.

My subject of choice is something that's been bugging the hell out of me for some time: John Kerry's vote on the Iraq War Resolution and his subsequent attempts to explain why he voted for it:

"I voted for the resolution to provide the President with the credible threat-force which I believe the President has to have," Kerry said, but added that he had presumed that Bush would respect multilateral institutions like the United Nations and would work with the world rather than going it alone.

Now, I will happily admit that the sum total of my foreign policy experience is limited to some very relaxing time on a Mexican beach every couple of years, and that my military and diplomatic credentials begin and end with a high-school addiction to the game Diplomacy. I've got nothing on John Kerry. Nothing. And I have even less on Wes Clark, who in the last couple of weeks seems to have aligned himself with Kerry's position.

The venerable Josh Marshall, who seems to be firmly in the Clark camp now, writes that "the heart of the matter [is] the difference between thinking that this war was ill-conceived and poorly planned (which I think is Clark's position) and being 'anti-war' in the sense of some broader political ethic." Marshall complains that some people--notably media watchdogs FAIR--see only this dichotomy, without any acknowledgement that there can be a third (or fourth or fifth) way about it.

But what Josh doesn't quite get is that it's not at all about being pro-Iraq war vs. being a pacifist. Dennis Kucinich is probaly the only true pacifist in this race, and the number of true pacifists in the Democratic party is probably not much bigger than the number of DK supporters. No, the real issue is the vote. Period.

Joe Lieberman has been prattering on for a long time now about how the Iraq war is a "just war," and Edwards refuses to discuss his vote. Gephardt, of course, sold out Daschle and the Senate Dems there in the Rose Garden. Those three seem to be fully on the one side of that vote.

Dean, Kucinich, Sharpton, Moseley Braun, and the (departing?) Bob Graham have all been consistently against waging this war. That's the other side of the vote. (I know DK and Graham are the only ones of those actually to vote on it.)

But Kerry and Clark now seem to want to populate the middle, saying that a yes vote in October 2002 was the only way to go, since without it, there would have been no likelihood of a peaceful solution. I say that's bunk. Why? Simple:

You cannot give a lighter to an arsonist and expect him not to start a fire!

They had to have known that Bush would go to war. Unquestionably, they had to know. I mean, I knew, and, as I said, I don't have squat in the experience department.

And Clark! My god, if he's the modern war genius his supporters claim, he must have been daft to think that Bush would not take the blank check right down the street to the liquor store.

Most other presidents? Sure, they may have acted responsibly. This one? No. And I'm not just saying that because I have a visceral reaction when I see him or hear him or think about him. The Bush administration established early on in his term a pattern of idiocy, of disregarding the international community (even after 9/11!), and of unabashed militarism. They spent the summer of 2002 talking about "march to war, march to war," while stepping up attacks in the no-fly zone and building new bases (thanks, Brown & Root!) all over the middle east to accomodate the troops that they knew, well before October, would be taking out Saddam.

Know what really gets me about Clark's position? He knew since the morning of September 11 that the administration wanted to go after Iraq. Whether or not the phone call he got that day was from the White House, it still should have been obvious--like, written across the sky in big letters obvious--that there was no stopping the march to war in Iraq.

No stopping it, that is, except for Congress. Yet, they voted to give that lighter to that arsonist. Now, who do we blame for starting the fire?

ADDITIONAL READING:
I tried to find a way to work this in above, but Matt Langer over at Untelevised has a good take on this, too. He writes, in part, "the moderate Democratic support of multilateral invasion is easily pidgeonholed into the position of tacitly endorsing the Bush doctrine of pre-emptive strike, perhaps the most horrific result of the post-Sept 11 world. The natural defense to this accusation would be to bring up the continued Iraqi violation of a handful of UN resolutions, but this doesn't explain the pressing imminence that the situation in Iraq developed seemingly overnight. And regardless of the aforesaid resolutions, any invasion of Iraq - even a UN-sanctioned one - that was not in response to an aggressive action would have been inherently unjust and a gross violation of international sovereignty."

You go, Matt.

The Scandal (and more)

OPEN SOURCE POLITICS has exploded in readership this week. These entries have become must reads for the informed:

Robert Novak is a coward, The CIA's Patriotic Math, A Matter of Trust, I Have A Little List ... are all about The Valerie Plame Affair.

There's also the Ben Franklin True Patriot Act Action Alert, Pie In the Sky, The Politics of Power Barry's two-parter, Asbestos Legislation #1 and #2, and the Florida Political Breakdown. Plus, part two of my series on NCLB!

It's all good.