There will be public hearings about the Brooks porn fear mongering campaign in mid-April. The first one is scheduled for Thursday April 12 from 6-8 pm at the Central Library in the Kate Gleason Auditorium.

Recently DFE weighed in on the whole Maggie Brooks Election 2007 Pledge/Porn-mania! ™Â  We quoted him here, and it kicked off a ***STORM*** of controversy on the D&C’s Chili blogger’s blog.  A respectful (mostly) discussion ensued, with one question unanswered.  If this is a fight that Brooks will not win due to things like, uh, the Constitution, why would she waste taxpayer money grandstanding about it then taking it to court?

It really does seem that this is just election year politics.

Another interesting thing came out of the discussion.  Jerri Kaiser, one of the D&C Editorial Board community members, made the comment:

I think Ms. Brooks will lose in court. That is just my opinion as a citizen. The expenditure of county resources on this troubles me because we have 30% of our city’s residents living below the poverty line. The mayor told me today that 48% of our city’s residents don’t graduate high school. These are the issues that affect our daily lives. How can we be complacent when our neighbors are hungry, undereducated and therefore have a bleak future?

I like that she’s got her priorities in the right place.  I really like that. A lot.  But she also said this:

The more we talk/type about this issue the more it validates Ms. Brooks’ decision to threaten the library instead of working with them. It creates a buzz, the humming of distraction for the worker bees in the hive. Let’s quiet the buzz and advocate for the things that matter here, honey. Otherwise, we all get stung.

And it got me thinking.  Are we playing into the hands of Minarik/Brooks by raising such an anti-stink to match the stink they’re raising?  Are we better served by ONLY advocating for more basic issues?  After a lot of thought, I don’t think so.  Reasons after the fold.

__(’Read the rest of this entry »’)

Bernie Kerik is becoming more and more of a liability for Rudy Guiliani. Yesterday, we learned that America’s estranged father was briefed about some of Kerik’s wrongdoing long before he recommended Kerik be made head of Department of Homeland Security. Today, we learned that Kerik is about to get indicted:

Federal prosecutors have told Bernard B. Kerik, whose nomination as homeland security secretary in 2004 ended in scandal, that he is likely to be charged with several felonies, including tax evasion and conspiracy to commit wiretapping.

Kerik’s indictment could set the stage for a courtroom battle that would draw attention to Kerik’s extensive business and political dealings with former New York mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani, who personally recommended him to President Bush for the Cabinet. Giuliani, the front-runner for the 2008 Republican presidential nomination according to most polls, later called the recommendation a mistake.

I wonder if the wiretapping indictment has anything to do with Republican Attorney General candidate Jeanine Pirro’s efforts to get Kerik to bug her husband’s house boat.

Is it time for the papers to start hiring crime reporters to cover the Republican party?

One thing I like about the D&C’s town blogs is that they provide a glimpse into local politics in the towns where we don’t live.  The Chili blog has been talking about their supervisors race:

…we have yet, another person vying for the supervisor position. Tim Lancaster is the treasurer of the Chili Democratic Committee. He is a staunch environmentalist, who apparently feels Chili doesn’t need any more development. Quite the opposite of Jim Ehmann. David Dunning, what is your take on this?

(All these folks are running for town office.)

She also adds this:

What do you think about Mr. Lancaster’s stance on development in Chili? My opinion is to keep it green.

Good on her.  There’s a ton of interesting comments after as well.  Like I said, Mia’s is one of the more interesting of the Town Blogs.

What is the difference in these headlines

Defiant Senate passes war bill

or

Senate war-funding bill includes troop withdrawal from Iraq

Headlines are important because they set the tone of the article. One puts the onus on the Senate, one is neutral. Well, the D&C choose the first, the author of the column chose the second.

See, the D&C gets news off the wires and reprints them - some of that corporate cost containment. Apparently they modify the headlines. So this article by Renee Schoof from McClatchy newspapers appeared on the front page of today’s D&C.

Now, when it comes to Iraq. I believe, Iraq is not the central front in the war on terror but a diversion from finding and disrupting groups who use terror as a tactic. I believe the diversion in Iraq makes us weaker not stronger militarily, economically and socially.

Most importantly, I also believe that the American people are waking up to this an on November 7th voted for representation who will end the war.

So my question is who is being defiant? President Bush or Congress, in this case the Senate.

Why can’t the headline say Bush defies will of people, will veto war funding bill

D&C - get it right.

Oh - here is the rest of the article.

WASHINGTON - Rejecting President Bush’s plans to build up American military forces in Iraq, the Senate passed a $123 billion bill Thursday that fully funds the war but demands that U.S. forces start to exit.

The emergency-spending bill, mainly for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, passed 51-47, with most Democrats voting for it and most Republicans against. It was the first time the Senate passed a bill that challenged the president’s war plans, and it paves the way for a conflict with Bush in the weeks ahead.

Renee has some fact issues as well. Rejecting the build up? No - all the requested war funding is allowed in the bill. No, the issue is time line.

Congress speaking the will of the people, President Bush not.

I’m not a Hillary-basher, but I couldn’t help but be struck by the subject line of her most recent fund-raising email: I never could have anticipated. As in “no one could have anticipated that the levees would be breached.” Or “we never anticipated that they would fly planes into buildings.” To make matters worse, what she never could have anticipated was, of course, something everyone anticipated — that as she goes around the country she is meeting  “people who tell me they’re ready to do whatever they can to make our campaign a success.”

Memo to candidates everywhere: your job as president is to anticipate things (downturns in the economy, terrorist attacks, the failures of poorly constructed levees and dams, revenue shortfalls). Don’t send out emails claiming you never could have anticipated something obvious. We’ve had enough of that over the past six years.

Because this story is good:

Rudolph W. Giuliani told a grand jury that his former chief investigator remembered having briefed him on some aspects of Bernard B. Kerik’s relationship with a company suspected of ties to organized crime before Mr. Kerik’s appointment as New York City police commissioner, according to court records.

Mr. Giuliani, testifying last year under oath before a Bronx grand jury investigating Mr. Kerik, said he had no memory of the briefing, but he did not dispute that it had taken place, according to a transcript of his testimony.

Mr. Giuliani’s testimony amounts to a significantly new version of what information was probably before him in the summer of 2000 as he was debating Mr. Kerik’s appointment as the city’s top law enforcement officer. Mr. Giuliani had previously said that he had never been told of Mr. Kerik’s entanglement with the company before promoting him to the police job or later supporting his failed bid to be the nation’s homeland security secretary.

In his testimony, given in April 2006, Mr. Giuliani indicated that he must have simply forgotten that he had been briefed on one or more occasions as part of the background investigation of Mr. Kerik before his appointment to the police post.

“Forgotten that he had been briefed on or more occasions”? He would have fit right in in the Bush administration.  Maybe that’s unfair, since Rudy did admit recommending  a mobbed up hack for Director of Homeland Security was a mistake:

The statement added: “Mayor Giuliani has admitted it was a mistake to recommend Bernie Kerik for D.H.S. and he has assumed responsibility for it.”

I guess when you contrast that with Dick Cheney — who forced the man he shot to apologize for being shot — it doesn’t sound so bad.

Yep, you remember the town halls and debates were Randy Kuhl (NY-29) said he was listening to the region’s ambassadors. There was debate and more discussion on Rochesterturning.

Well - maybe he should have added the the Saudi King Abdullah to his listening tour. Then again, maybe he can simply listen to his constituents and join the Democrats leading our country out of Iraq. From the New York Times

RIYADH, Saudi Arabia — King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia told Arab leaders on Wednesday that the American occupation of Iraq is “illegal,” and he warned that unless Arab governments settle their differences, foreign powers like the United States would continue to dictate the region’s politics.

Fake raids help earn us good will, Saudi Arabia says our occupation is illegal, and we have lost 3244 (as of this post) American sons and daughters.

Ask Randy Kuhl at his latest round of Town Hall meetings if the fact that the King of Saudi Arabia called the American Occupation illegal has changed his mind on Iraq.

I doubt you will get an answer.

From the D&C

(March 29, 2007) — The number of total non-farm jobs in the Rochester region rose by 1,100 jobs or 0.8 of a percent in February, according to the latest data from the State Department of Labor released today.

There were 507,400 people employed in non-farm jobs for the month, compared to 506,300 in February of last year.

Unemployment for the month was 5.1 percent, compared to 5.3 percent last year.

Anyone have the population numbers? I don’t, but I’d be willing to bet the population decreased during the year… hence lowering the unemployment rate… It wouldn’t be the first time we’ve had funny numbers on our unemployment rate.

Amazing, I never thought the day would come… but according to a story on mydd.com today, Rove’s list of vulnerable Republican Congressmen was released… Among them, our own Jim Walsh (NY-25) and Randy Kuhl (NY-29). Perhaps most surprising is that Kuhl is listed in the “may not seek re-election” category… We’ll see about that, I haven’t seen any signs that Kuhl is ready to retire, but Walsh might want to consider a long vacation after telling voters how disappointed he was in them…

Hat tip to astute reader Bill for sending us this tip… which all of you can do by clicking the “About/ Contact Us” button on the right toolbar.

Ever wonder who those progressive organizations listed on our toolbar are? Well I thought it might be a good idea to introduce everyone to these groups, and explain why we endorse them…

DFA Rochester began as part of a national network of Howard Dean activists. Howard Dean was really the first candidate to recognize the power of the internet in political campaigns, and with that in mind, Dean For America was formed. Using the web to connect activists and supporters, it wasn’t long before local chapters were founded all over the country, including our own DFA Rochester.

As we all know Howard Dean did not become president in 2004, however with groups formed and local activists united, Dean for America transitioned into Democracy for America.  The new DFA focused on civic action, endorsing/supporting (and I mean actually helping rather than just offering verbal support) good candidates, and establishing a longterm progressive movement at the grassroots level.

If you’re new to the political scene or veteran at volunteering, DFA is a great way to meet and work with a number of likeminded people. They meet on the first Wednesday of every month at Jay’s Diner @ 7 PM, so why not sign up (I promise it only takes a minute), and stop out next Wednesday for a great bite to eat and some quality discussion.

I picked up the Wall Street Journal –

See, if you are the U.S. Army, you need to keep tabs on the distribution of rebuilding funds but you can’t tell anyone who is receiving funds lest the “bad” guys find out and blow up the place. So what do you do? You stage stage fake raids looking for imaginary insurgents.

This kind of crap is what passes for success in the minds of our Western New York Congressman when they vote to continue the failed Iraq policies of their Republican party. We can thank Congressman Kuhl, Congressman Walsh and Congressman Reynolds for helping to sustain this war.

A war where fake raids are needed because they provide fake arrests which gives credibility to a select few because they aren’t seen as working with the Americans. Geez, it is that successful arrest every single Iraqi and we can leave now.

You can read the article by Yochi J Dreazen here or the excepts below - all emphasis is mine.

__(’Read the rest of this entry »’)

From TalkingPointsMemo:

So who’s Rove worried about? The presentation lists the following Republican House members as on the “Priority Defense” list:

Jim Gerlach, Pennsylvania
Vern Buchanan, Florida
Robin Hayes, North Carolina
Heather Wilson, New Mexico
Marilyn Musgrave, Colorado
Peter Roskam, Illinois
Chris Shays, Connecticut
Jean Schmidt, Ohio
Thelma Drake, Virginia
Barbara Cubin, Wyoming (Note: Rove also says that Cubin might not seek re-election.)
John Doolittle, California
Jon Porter, Nevada
Jim Walsh, New York
Deborah Pryce, Ohio
Randy Kuhl, New York
Mike Ferguson, New Jersey
Joe Knollenberg, Michigan

My favorite state blog — The Albany Project — poses the question:

I’m very happy to see The Albany Project taking flight, and it’s good to have a source of news on the latest battles for reform in Albany.

I have kind of a big question, though: how do we get this message out to a lot more people?

What do people think?

I’d also like to put a local twist on this, if I may: this is a special challenge for upstaters, because the stereotype has been that, at the state level, the Democratic party only pays attention to downstate while the Republicans make some effort to look after upstate. I’m not sure that’s true, but the stereotype remains: how do we convince upstaters that redistricting reform (which would almost certainly put Democrats in charge of both state legislative bodies) would help upstate? To me, the argument is that a fundamentally undemocratic form of government (such as the one we have in Albany) invariably leads to corruption and inefficiency. But how do we bring that home with specifics? Not everyone is as committed to democracy as a principle as we are. We need hard facts about how this would improve things upsate.

Any takers for this discussion?  There’s a lively discussion in the TAP comments (about the more general question of how to spread the reform message) as well.

Joe Klein is the president of Klein Steel Services in Rochester (where retired General John Batiste now works). He had a piece in the D&C a few days ago about how the state could help Rochester get back on its feed economically. He’s described himself as a 60s liberal, but has also been sharply critical of what he feels is a hostile climate for business in New York State. The piece is pretty detailed in what he’d like to see changed; it includes things like adopting the Brennan reforms recommended for the NYS legislature as well as other things I’m not very familiar with. It’s worth a read in any case.