Now that I’m attending the Democratic National Convention as a credentialed blogger, it’s probably time I commented on the Presidential race; I haven’t done so since the high holidays, and then it was the Republicans (I basically concluded that if a madman held a gun against my testes and threatened to shoot if I didn’t state my preference among the GOP candidates, I would reluctantly name McCain).

I'm a Clinton Democrat, but originally was "anyone but Hillary" because I thought she wasn't electable. I was hoping Gore would run on grounds of both electability and policy.

Barring that, I preferred Edwards--but only on electability. On policy and gravitas, I liked Biden (Richardson almost qualified, but seemed too much a loose cannon--which is saying a lot when you are comparing someone to Biden), but both Clinton and Obama appealed to me more than Edwards on policy.

I fully acknowledged that, in general election, a white woman seemed more electable than a black man, but we're weren’t talking about a generic white woman and a generic black man, and I wasn’t sure who was more electable in a contest between this particular white woman and this particular black man. However, when it comes to electing a Democrat, I'll take a cracker everytime. Won for us in 64, 76, 92, 96 & 2000 (LOL!).

Once Edwards was out, I was stumped. Since electability was not the issue, I had to consider policy. Clinton and Obama seemed equally willing to deviate from the party received wisdom, which was good, but in each case, their deviations were equally likely as the other's to be wrong. Actually Clinton impressed me more, but Obama seemed extremely willing to stand up to the teacher's unions, which earns a lot of points in the Gatemouth/Domestic Partner household (our youngest son, Dybbuk is about to start school, a process which in New York City requires intrigues which would have shamed the Borgias). I was really undecided.

That is, until LBJ became an issue in the race. I went off the deep end when Obama called Hillary's historically accurate remarks concerning the symbiotic roles of LBJ and MLK in passing the Civil Rights laws "unfortunate". And the more I watched the race, the more annoyed I got with him. Though I prefer single payer, on the neo-liberal grounds that employer based health insurance is hurting American competitiveness, I thought Obama's health care plan was especially lacking, and while I could hardly blame him for copping out on mandatory coverage, I could and did blame him for attacking Clinton on it. Frankly, after the LBJ thing, I just found Obama more and more annoying every time I watched a debate. To me "Hope" ain't nuthin but a little town in Arkansas, and it's just as likely to produce a Mike Huckabee as a Bill Clinton

Domestic Partner was unrelenting in trying to persuade me into voting for Obama, basically threatening me with a Lysistrata. One evening, in an effort not intended to persuade, but merely to get DP to leave me alone, I went through my list of reasons. Finally I ended with "and what do you think Obama would do if there were another Bosnia or Kosovo?"

"I don't know"

"Exactly; neither do I. But I do know that the "just say no" (to any use of American force, ever, for any reason, even to stop genocide) crowd is backing him. And I do know what Hillary would do, because she already did it. It was she and Al Gore who persuaded Bill to get off his ass and do the right thing."

And Domestic Partner switched sides, genocide being the ultimate character issue, at least for the child of someone who spent three years living in an attic like Anne Frank. Later, during the Hillary is a “power hungry bitch” incident, I learned of Obama advisor Samantha Power’s work in this very area, and I realized that Obama, who’d sought Power out because of her book on genocide, was also good to go on this issue (Outside of horny adolescent males, I may be the one voter in America who found Power a net plus for Obama). But, by then, Domestic Partner had acquired the fervor of the convert, and is still holding out for a Clinton victory as we speak.

But, as I’ve said, conversion wasn’t my intent. By then DP’s sister, Feygele, had converted our five year old into a rabid Obamaniac. Since Dybbuk was so excited about Obama, I was really hoping that one of us would be able to take him to vote and actually let him pull the lever for his guy.

There was no reasoning with Feygele, who talks about Clinton evil in terms resembling those of Richard Mellon Scaife and other members of the “Great Right Wing Conspiracy”. I'm still waiting for her to bring up the murder of Vincent Foster. At any rate, my son now hates Hillary. When I showed him the letter Bill Clinton sent him after he was born, he responded that he liked Bill Clinton but still hated Hillary. Still later, when he saw Chelsea on TV with Hillary and Bill, he asked who the girl was. When I told him, he asked me if she had a boyfriend.

Domestic Partner went with Dybbuk to Obama Headquarters in Lower Manhattan and got him a poster. But the poster had no picture. On the Sunday before the primary, I saw a sandwich poster with a picture of Obama at the local subway stop. I carefully peeled the tape to remove one poster, but leave the other hanging, and took it home. I realized that this was probably the first campaign that, when they hung signs, had more to worry about from supporters than opponents.

A couple of nights later, when I was reading him his bedtime story, Dybbuk told me his Obama poster was talking to his ET poster, which is sort of how I feel about the Obama campaign myself. A couple weeks later, he told me one night he was scared of ghosts. I told him that we were downstairs if he needed us, and he was still not placated. Then I said that Obama and ET were there to watch over him. He responded, "but they are not real". Exactly!

On primary day, I let Dybbuk pull down the lever for Obama, then I put it back up so I could vote for Hillary. Since it had no impact on delegate allocation, I did allow him to vote for two Obama delegates, the better to block one guy I disliked. Dybbuk seemed OK with that.

That seems like an eternity ago, even to a guy who remembers the 80s like yesterday. And speaking of the 80s, the Clinton campaign put me in mind of Hollywood mega-disaster All-Star money-pit referred to in the title; I’m picturing our Senator and her spouse stranded in the desert with a blind camel (is it Terry McAuliffe?) yelling at the vultures that they’re not dead yet. And what became of the hope engendered by the Obama crusade? Is he just Warren Beatty to Hillary’s Dustin Hoffman? Sadly, I fear we may be in for a McCain landslide of McGovernite proportions. But, that’s the good news; it won't be a Reagan/Carter type landslide.

In 1972, the Democratic Presidential nominee lost 49 states, but there were no significant loses in Congress, we might even have picked up a few seats. By contrast, Jimmy Carter’s 1980 loss was less daunting than McGovern’s, but his party lost control of the Senate, as well as enough Republicans to often achieve working control of the House.

What the recent special Congressional elections in Ole Miss and the Big Sleazy prove is that making Obama the issue won't work. Obama may lose, but it won’t save the Republicans down-ballot from their well-deserved and long-overdue thrashing.
By contrast, if Obama is denied the nomination after winning the majority of elected delegates, so many black voters will stay home, or even desert, that both houses will be lost. I think the party hacks understand where self interest lies, and will go with Obama--I know I would.

Announcing the State Blogger Corps

Posted by Aaron Myers on May 14, 2008

Months ago, we began the process of credentialing bloggers who cover state and local politics, as part of the DemConvention State Blogger Corps. More than 400 blogs applied for the program. And they’re incredible. Some blogs are the work of dedicated groups of activists, a few are full-time professional endeavors, and many others are the products of busy individuals blogging about local politics in their free time. Those selected to be part of our State Blogger Corps were announced today. And in every case, these bloggers have become experts on the political happenings in their states.

You’ll see a list below of the 55 blogs that will comprise the State Blogger Corps. They’ll be seated with their respective delegations at the Convention. These bloggers will have some of the best seats in the house and they’ll be the eyes and ears of local audiences online around the country.

Congratulations to each blog selected for the State Blogger Corps. I’ll see you in Denver!

Credentialed blog for NEW YORK: Room 8 - http://www.r8ny.com

The Daily Gotham DOES NOT get into the DNC blogger corps

Submitted by Liza Sabater on 14 May 2008

Well this totally sucks. Not only that, but not one of the netroots blogs from New York State --you know, the ones that actually help the party raise money for their candidates-- got into the state pool.

Who gets in? Oh, yeah, right, the blog owned by the pro-Clinton journalist that now rights for Politico.com.
Nice.

I just find this odd, that none of the blogs that have helped the NY Democratic Party raise thousands of dollars for local candidates and worked hard to get out the vote here in the state, not one of them got credentialed in the state pool.

This is very odd indeed.

Feh

Submitted by mole333 on 14 May 2008.

The State Party, much like my local Brooklyn machine, is all about power and influence. They don't WANT us to get too big for our britches. The whole Spitzer/Cuomo wave was accompanied by behind the scenes thuggishness that was a turn off for me back then, and which meant Spitzer's downfall and this kind of stuff is no surprise to me. People who are far more insider than us got screwed at the NY State Convention if they didn't toe the line. I never expected to get recognition from the State Party.
Once you get beyond New York I have found far more appreciation when you help out.

Frankly I'm baffled too.

Room 8 has been chosen as NY State's credentialed blog for the Democratic National Convention--the two-person delegation will be myself and Rock Hackshaw. Rock and I have been told that, depending on how many credentials are allocated, we may have to rotate the Room 8 credential. And you thought the destructive infighting was nearly over.

For a change, I sympathize with the “progressives”. Room 8 is not in existence to do political work (although some of the bloggers here clearly do contracts for their friends or for hire) and is neither "an effective online organizing tool" nor "an agent of change". Our application wasn't even really a group submission--Gur coordinated very little, and Rock Hackshaw and I (apparently no one else was interested), each had to submit separate forms, and mine was a goof--I told them I was essential to accomplishing their goals because the netroots lefties were going to be represented in droves, and I was a rarity: a partisan Democratic blogger who could reach out to centrist voters, and was therefore exactly what they needed. With Rock handling base mobilization, together we were New York blogging’s dream ticket, and just as compatible as Hillary and Barack (or, for that matter, Hillary and Bill).

I never in a million years expected to be selected. I guess it helps when your co-publisher writes an influential national political blog.

Contrary to Mole, I doubt this was the state party's doing--first of all 50% of the Room 8 delegation is Hackshaw-- I just think someone at the DNC made a conscious decision to bring in general interest blogs. Liza and Mole would find the New Jersey choice even worse--Hackshaw and I will at least be supporting Obama in November--in NJ, the choice is PolitickerNJ, which is a professional news operation--and a great one (we should only have something so good in NY)--but Hackshaw and I at least fall arguably within the DNC's stated criteria—PolitickerNJ does not; it should really be part of the general press pool rather than a credentialed blog. By the DNC's stated criteria, the Garden State choice should have been “Blue Jersey”. I suspect the same phenomena also occurred in many other states

The DNC seems confused--they put out an APB asking for one kind of blogger, and, at least in NY and NJ, selected quite another, and, even by that criteria, Room 8 seems a strange choice. Many, myself included, have written us off as a dead shark; this may be our chance for a triumphant revival—or it may just be our West Virginia.

I'm quite dazed

Friends have been calling from near and far.

ROSCOE CONWAY: At last; a Huntley and Brinkley for the 21st Century. Well, either that or a Tex Antoine and a Carl Stokes for the 21st Century...

GATE: I was think of us more as Sammy Davis, Jr. and Peter Lawford

ROSCOE: Ah, Davis and Lawford, co-stars of the 1968 film "Salt and Pepper". As Don Lockwood and Cosmo Brown used to say, "Dignity. Always, dignity." Let's see, who's who..? Gate, you wearing an eyepatch these days?

GATE: Well I'm the Jew, and Rock speaks a lot more like Peter Lawford than I do. BTW, did you know it was Sammy who played Salt and Lawford Pepper? And don't forget the sequel--"One More Time" directed by Jerry Lewis (what did Dino think?) where Sammy spent the whole film channeling the director, like Kevin Branagh in “Celebrity”

RORHBERGER: Is this any comment on the relative talents of the two people involved?

GATE: Funny you should ask, in response to a vicious attack on my 2006 Primary guide, my evil twin "Brooklyn Fats" posted a nasty screed posted containing the following:

"59th AD: Vito loves the pernicious Jefferson Club. Gatemouth sents it a Valentine’s card. Yes, there are a few sarcastic remarks; the kind the Chairman of the Board used to make about Dino when the Rat Pack performed at the Sands."

And this was posted in response:

Gatey a pack rat?

Submitted by Peter Lawford (not verified) on Mon, 09/18/2006

Gatey the Chairman? Surely you jest. Gatey thinks he's Sammy Davis; he's actually Joey Bishop.”

Maybe, but like the Chairman of the Board, I have “High Hopes”

Some time ago, the New York City Partnership (equivalent to the Chamber of Commerce) put out a report saying the Second Avenue Subway (SAS) should be cancelled, since the Upper East Side is already built out and that investment wouldn't generate growth, but the Flushing Line extension was critical because it would open up a new area to development.  I wrote to them in opposition. My response at the time was that the promise of the SAS already induced lots of building on the East Side, and the failure to deliver left Upper East Side residents paying massive taxes while cramming onto the Lex like sardines. If the Partnership was against the SAS from a cost-benefit perspective, I said, what it should be in favor of on the West Side was promising the Flushing Extension, borrowing money for the Flushing Extension, planning the Flushing Extension, having lots of people invest in new buildings expecting to be served by the Flushing Extension, collecting massive taxes on those new buildings, but then NEVER ACTUALLY BUILD IT.  Future residents and workers of Hudson Yards could walk over to 8th Avenue and cram on the 8th Avenue line instead.

Per the New York Times: "The developer was also negotiating with city officials over other promised West Side projects, including the subway line. If the cost of the subway exceeded $2.1 billion, Tishman Speyer wanted assurances that either the state or the city would provide additional financing. It never got them." LOOKS LIKE MY SUGGESTION DIDN'T WORK!

And that’s just directly. The reason that residents of the Downstate Suburbs accounted for 27.9% of the personal income earned by state residents, while businesses in those suburbs accounted for just 18.3% of the earnings is money earned in the state, is money earned by surburbanites in Manhattan. And when that money is spent in the suburbs, that generates part of the 18.3% earned there. The reason that residents of Upstate New York accounted for 27.0% of the state’s personal income but its private businesses accounted for only 20.9% of the money earned in the state is taxes collected in Downstate New York (earned in Manhattan) and spent in Upstate New York. Adding in the indirect effects, Manhattan may account for three-quarters of the state’s economy.

Government earnings, in fact, accounted for 22.7% of the money earned in Upstate New York, compared with 16.3% in the Downstate Suburbs, 16.5% in the United States, and just 10.4% in New York City. And many of New York City’s best paying government jobs, by state law, are held by commuters from the suburbs, while New York City residents are generally barred from government jobs outside the city, one of zillions of distinctions just like is. No wonder the State of New York continually passes laws asserting that New York City public employees are expected to do less for New York City residents in exchange for more.

New York City’s public spending is more likely to flow to the non-profit health care and social assistance sector, primarily via Medicaid. That sector accounted for 8.1% of the money earned in New York City, but that is lower than the 9.3% in the United States, the 12.45 in the Downstate Suburbs, and the 11.5% in Upstate New York. So it would appear that New York City doesn’t have a disproportionately large health care and social assistance sector in terms of earnings (it does in terms of employment), but a disproportionately large share of the money spent on that sector in New York City comes from government payments.

Indeed government transfer payments, including in-kind payments such as Medicaid, accounted for 18.2% of the income of city residents in 2006, far above the share in the Downstate Suburbs or the United States, but even in this case lower than the share in Upstate New York at 19.3%. In addition, many of those government “jobs” in the rest of the state are really not real jobs at all, but the equivalent of “welfare” for “hard working” people.

If there is anything more ridiculous than suburban and Upstate residents sucking money out of New York City while sneering at it, it is outer borough politicians sneering at Manhattan. It isn’t just that many residents of the outer boroughs work in Manhattan and travel there every day by subway. It is that one-fifth to one-third of the income of outer-borough residents is received with no work in return at all, and comes from transfer payments funded by federal, state and local taxes paid by people who work in Manhattan. And a huge share of the earnings of those working in the outer boroughs comes from the health care and social assistance sector, also funded primarily by taxes paid by those working in Manhattan.

New York State and New York City are lucky to have a dynamic economic engine such as Manhattan. But the State of New York, in order to enrich interests with a very high sense of entitlement, might very well destroy it, either by destroying the transit system or choking it off with high and discriminatory taxes. If the lords of finance don’t kill it off be destroying the reputation of the city’s businesses for fair dealing first.
]]> http://www.r8ny.com/blog/senator_reverend_ruben_diaz/open_letter_to_vito_fossella.html 2008-05-10T11:55:13-07:00 2008-05-10T16:46:55-07:00 Senator Reverend Ruben Diaz

A political operative from Bed-Stuy recently asked me whether or not Caribbean-Americans were trying to pull a coup in Brooklyn politics; I said no. He told me that rumors were out there that Caribs were intent on challenging Congresswoman Yvette Clarke, Assemblyman Camara (43rdAD), Senator John Sampson (19thSD) and Parker, all at the same time. I don’t believe an iota of this. I have heard of no such organized attempt to change the power equation. As it stands now, Caribbean-Americans hold two city council seats (Stewart and Mathieu Eugene), and one Assembly seat (Nick Perry/ 58thAD). They hold no congressional seats, no state senate seats, and only two district leaderships out of forty-two in Brooklyn. Thus the perception that Caribs are on some political power play (or trip) is so untrue it isn’t funny. This misperception dates back to when Panamanian-born State Senator Waldaba Stewart, was elected in Central Brooklyn- back in the 1970s.There has always been this perception (exaggeration) that Caribbean-Americans hold some disproportionate edge in political power/influence in Brooklyn’s majority-black areas; the reality however is that this has never ever been the case. Caribs have never held more than three offices at any one time in Brooklyn’s political history. Given that they are one million strong in the borough, you would think that it will be only fair if they do make some power moves; but then the Caribbean-American vote is not organized: it has never been organized. It will probably never be organized. What does Caribbean-American mean anyway?

Kevin Parker is about to face an ethnic struggle like he has never experienced; maybe he won’t survive, or maybe he will. It all depends on how muddy the race gets. The feeling amongst many residents is that he has been an abject failure during his six years in office. Despite the recent troubles that Stewart encountered- through the legal woes of two staffers - many see him as the better choice by far. And this is not just some Caribbean-American versus African-American “thing”; it’s about proper representation for all residents of the district. The feeling is that Stewart is much more accessible to constituents than Parker is. Some residents complain that it takes way too long to get through to the senator. They say Parker is ineffective as an elected official; so tell me something new!

Parker has gone through more staffers in his short time in office, than women go through panty-hoses in a leap year. He is slowly becoming the new “Ada Smith” of the state legislature. Just like Ada he has also been accused of ‘putting his hands’ on staff members, and treating other staffers “like shit”. He has also disrespected so many people that he is probably the least liked elected official in Brooklyn; and given how whites dislike Charles Barron; this is no easy achievement for anyone else. Parker has been a dismal failure on constituent services and offers no legislative accomplishments of note. Yet he is going to be supported by the institutional members of the political status quo (unions included). Look for him to pull down heavy-hitting endorsements from people like former NYC mayor David Dinkins, and former state comptroller Carl McCall. They need to be careful with this guy: he is a ticking time-bomb; he will surely embarrass them one of these days unless they get him some psychological help..

There is talk within the district that Parker has treated many people (especially women) horribly, all through his adult life. There are many people supporting Stewart in this challenge who were supportive of Parker before; that’s not a good sign for Kevin. There are females in the district who swear that he is a misogynist. Others think he is a “fucking lunatic” (I am quoting here folks). When he supposedly assaulted the employee from the Department of Transportation- for giving him a ticket while he was double parked – some felt that he was unraveling. Community activist Wellington Sharpe actually sued him for assault, defamation of character and slander amongst other things. Sharpe says that Parker is “totally out of control”.

In 2001 Stewart defeated Parker in the 45th city council race; now Parker is supporting former district leader (58thAD) Weyman Carey against Stewart for the leadership spot that Stewart also holds. Word on the street is that the young attorney Terry Hinds will run for the assembly or the district leadership in the same district (or for both spots). Hinds, who recently became the proud father of a healthy baby boy, has been putting off any decisions about running until his wife had delivered; now that this is out the way expect a decision from him soon. Whatever he does, it will have an impact on the Parker v. Stewart primary, since about half of the 58thAD comes into play in this senate race.

Stewart is supremely confident that he will defeat Parker in this upcoming primary, despite some recent setbacks. He said that Parker (who he supported in 2002) has been a major disappointment. He articulated a long list of Parker’s failings in the community, and he said that support for his challenge continues to grow. Stewart’s name has appeared on the voting machines nine times: he has won eight of those races. Parker’s name has appeared on the voting machines seven times: he has won six. Both these guys have high winning percentages folks; but remember that Stewart has whipped Parker before (2001).

One of the keys to unlocking the winner of this race will be the local endorsements. Assemblyman Nick Perry, the district leaders of 41, 42, 43, 44, 47, 48, 49 and 58 ADs, the local political clubs, other local elected officials, and of course both Una and Yvette Clarke, will all be instrumental in shaping this race. Expect many feelings to be hurt when endorsements don’t go the way they are somehow expected or supposed to go. The ramifications for future contention are tremendous. The fallout from this race will be toxic. Already there have been casualties. Prominent Caribbean-American journalist, activist and political operative Michael Roberts is currently managing Stewart’s campaign. Roberts - of Carib News fame - was instrumental in Parker’s initial victory in 2002. He came in late to steer that floundering campaign to a close victory, and many have credited him for Yvette Clarke’s congressional win two years ago. I am concerned that before this is over he may encounter one of Parker’s physical assaults. After all: Parker does have a hair-trigger temper when he gets angry. But then we can all hope that the anger-management courses that Parker was supposed to have done a few years ago: did work. Who knows: I might be in danger also/lol.

Stay tuned-in folks.

Are we requiring public officials to be morally perfect now? It is not like Fossella is the only person in his district who has kept a mistress or had a child with a woman who was not his wife. Or gotten a dui.

I want Fossella voted out of office based on his performance and poor political views. But the fact that he may have a less than perfect private life is not a reason for him to resign.