Joel Award Winner: Joy-Ann Reid

Joy-Ann Reid lashes out at progressives for the failure of the American Jobs Act to pass the Senate.

Every time something like this happens, I’m reminded of all the angry liberals who complain that President Obama hasn’t pursued more progressive policies on healthcare, or civilian trials for terrorists, or closing Gitmo, etc. Recall, always, that people like John Tester and Ben Nelson (and Joe Lieberman and Jim Webb and Joe Manchin) are in the Senate, and they are Democrats, too. Which means that it isn’t just Republicans who stand in the way of the kind of progress progressives (and at this point, a strong majority of all Americans) crave.

I asked Reid on Twitter if she thought a more bipartisan bill would have passed. Reid never replied to me. What I do know is in the same post Reid wrote this.

The White House is now looking at ways to break up the bill and try and pass the parts that have “bipartisan support” — which in and of itself is elusive, since most Republicans won’t vote for anything this president is for, and many Democrats are practically Republicans.

Let me get this straight. Progressives shouldn't participate in democracy by advocating for the things that want because Republicans will vote against it. However, according to Reid, Republicans would filibuster anything (and have) if President Obama supports the legislation. This is Reid's political strategy? That isn't a strategy. That is defeatism.

Obama did the Reid strategy of appeasing Republicans and and corporate Democrats by attempting to outcut the Republicans during the debt ceiling fiasco. The result was Obama's poll numbers dropped like a rock.

As for corporate Democrat Ben Nelson, his poll numbers have sucked since 2009. Nelson is currently polling behind Nebraska Attorney General Jon Bruning. Democrats should have ran a candidate in the primary against Nelson. Voters are turning against Nelson because they are finally realizing that he stands for nothing. The midterm elections saw House Blue Dogs and Blanche Lincoln in the Senate. Democrat Bill Halter polled better for the general election. The Obama administration and the DNC decided to back Lincoln. The result was Republican John Boozman winning the seat. Again I asked how does Reid's strategy of appeasing corporate Democrats help maintain majorities?

Reid lashes out at progressives for somehow forcing President Obama to back a populist jobs bill. Reid goes on to say it doesn't matter what kind of bill the President supported because Republicans were going to filibuster it. This incoherent rant wins her the Joel Award for contradiction.

The truth is Obama got something for going on the offensive. The do nothing Republican House has been sitting on the trade deals for South Korea, Colombia and Panama. Obama and the Occupy movement have been demanding jobs. The House suddenly got off their collective asses and passed all three trade agreements. Obama tried being bipartisan and Republicans sat on writing legislation for the trade agreements. Ask yourself if Republicans would have moved if Obama continued being bipartisan.

Obamabot Alert: Joy-Ann Reid

Joy-Ann Reid wrote that she was extremely dubious that President Barack Obama would cut Social Security and Medicare.

When that “unnamed source”-laden Washington Post story came out earlier this week, claiming the White House was putting Social Security and Medicare cuts on the table, I was extremely dubious.

The Washington Post and Politico versions of the story quoted no one, cited no “unnamed administration officials” — only “sources with knowledge of the White House’s thinking” — always a sketchy concept. And the reports claimed that the White House was dangling entitlement cuts in front of cut-happy Republicans in exchange for ending the Bush tax cuts for the rich. But that made no sense, because everyone knows Republicans will never, ever go for it. Besides, Democrats don’t need to deal that hand, since those cuts will expire at the end of 2012, after the election is over, when regardless of the outcome that November, Democrats can let all of the Bush tax cuts die (including the ones Democrats want to keep, like the child tax credits, but there you go…) by simply refusing to bring them up for a vote in the Senate.

The problem is I tweeted to Reid instances when President Obama and Vice-President Joe Biden said that Social Security and Medicare were on the table. Reid was defending Obama. She didn't care about Social Security and Medicare. Reid is now defending cuts to Social Security.

@mygirls3333 not just Clinton. Tip O'Neil and some Dems who are still in Congress, voted for that 1983 plan that raised the Soc Sec ret age.

This tweet is laughable.

@ClarissaW no, I don't think he's proposing that. He did propose slightly increasing the existing means testing in Part D in his budget.

Means testing is a Republican talking point for cutting benefits. Means testing is reducing the number of people that qualify for Social Security. The current program is that any American can receive Social Security benefits when they retire. John Rother of the AARP points out how stupid means testing would be.

The notion that the benefits are an earned right separates Social Security from means-tested income-support programs. Social Security can help everyone. Means testing is a feature of taxpayer-funded welfare programs designed to help the poor. A means test would inevitably erode the universal and contributory nature of Social Security and some of the popular support that has sustained it for nearly 75 years.

We also should remember that Social Security already makes distinctions based on income. Lower-wage earners get a higher return on their contributions. Higher-income retirees pay income tax on a portion of their benefits. Given these progressive features, it's not logical to add a means test. In fact, Social Security is far more progressive than any other retirement program.

Social Security has a payroll tax that Americans invest into the SS system. These people are entitled to their benefits. There is no short term Social Security crisis. If Congress was really worried about Social Security they would stop raiding the fund and eliminate the $250,000 tax cap.

Reid went from Obama's is not cutting Social Security to means testing isn't cuts. What a joke.

The Joy-Ann Reid Award

The Joy-Ann Reid award goes to a blogger, pundit or politician who knowingly lies. Despite knowing the facts. It is only fitting that Reid should win the very first Joy-Ann Reid award.

Reid wrote a post attempting to debunk that President Barack Obama has placed entitlements on the table, as part of the debt reduction negotiations. I told Reid on Twitter that Obama and Vice-President Joe Biden have publicly said that entitlements are on the table. I also cited these instances.

Obama during the Twitter townhall meeting.

What we need to do is to have a balanced approach where everything is on the table. We need to reduce corporate loopholes. We need to reduce discretionary spending on programs that aren’t working. We need to reduce defense spending. Everything has -- we need to look at entitlements, and we have to say, how do we protect and preserve Medicare and Social Security for not just this generation but also future generations. And that’s going to require some modifications, even as we maintain its basic structure.

Vice-President Joe Biden said entitlements were being discussed during his negotiations with members of Congress.

He added that Republicans want “to talk about long-term Medicare costs — well, Democrats go ‘wait a minute’ … it’s all on the table. It’s all open to discussion.”

Reid knows this but still contends that the Obama administration never offered entitlements. Never mind that Obama's and Biden's positions have always been for entitlement cuts.

When that “unnamed source”-laden Washington Post story came out earlier this week, claiming the White House was putting Social Security and Medicare cuts on the table, I was extremely dubious.

The Washington Post and Politico versions of the story quoted no one, cited no “unnamed administration officials” — only “sources with knowledge of the White House’s thinking” — always a sketchy concept. And the reports claimed that the White House was dangling entitlement cuts in front of cut-happy Republicans in exchange for ending the Bush tax cuts for the rich. But that made no sense, because everyone knows Republicans will never, ever go for it. Besides, Democrats don’t need to deal that hand, since those cuts will expire at the end of 2012, after the election is over, when regardless of the outcome that November, Democrats can let all of the Bush tax cuts die (including the ones Democrats want to keep, like the child tax credits, but there you go…) by simply refusing to bring them up for a vote in the Senate.

New tax rates would have to be set. Republicans will drag both chambers of Congress to a standstill. Republicans would be willing to shut down government again. (There was a zero percent estate tax in 2010 because Congress could not agree on a rate.) Obama has been selling the extension as stimulus. Obama would rather extend the Bush tax cuts than have a long drawn out fight with Republicans. The 2010 lame duck session was proof of that.

Republicans originally asked for $2 trillion in deficit cuts. Obama upped the ante to $4 trillion. Obama is triangulating and trying to out cut the Republicans. House Speaker John Boehner offered to scale the deal back to $2 trillion. How does Reid propose that Obama will get to $4 trillion without touching entitlements?

I don't believe Reid is stupid. She is lying. Reid and many other black Americans feel a strong connection to Obama. There certainly has been many racist attacks against Obama. That kind of bigotry should be condemned. That doesn't mean progressive bloggers should say Obama never supported cutting entitlements. Obama has been on-the-record about entitlements being a part of deficit reduction.

We live in a democracy. We don't have to mindlessly follow our elected leaders. Obama is better than the weak field of Republicans running against him. I am well-aware of the damage a President Michele Bachmann or President Ron Paul could cause. That doesn't mean we back Obama on Medicare cuts that would hurt seniors and affect job growth in the health care industry.

Quote of the Day

"Riddle me this: if Prez Obama was proposing Medicare/Soc Sec cuts, why wouldn't Republican, rather than Dem sources leak, hell, shout it?"

Blogger Joy-Ann Reid, on Twitter.

Really Joy. You are now floating conspirary theories. Obama talked about cuts to entitlement in his Twitter townhall meeting. I blogged my reaction.

Obama offers entitlements for cuts. Republicans are willing to let country default to protect corporate jet breaks. Obama again sounds delusional.

Can Reid explain how Obama doesn't support entitlement cuts that he has publicly offered. Vice-President Joe Biden offered Medicare to the Republicans. Entitlement cuts isn't a fiction being spread about Team Obama. It is their long stated policy goal. When the entitlement deal is made Reid will come out in support of it. I guarantee that.

Tas has shared is feelings about "Obamabots."

Rick Scott Drug-Testing Victory Lap

Gov. Rick Scott is excited that people who receive unemployment compensation will have to submit to a drug test. How excited? Scott decided to share the news on his official web site.

Today, I signed HB 353, keeping my promise to require drug screening for welfare recipients.

The bill is designed to increase personal accountability and prevent Florida’s tax dollars from subsidizing drug addiction, while still providing for needy children. Parents failing the required drug test may designate another individual to receive the benefits on behalf of the children.

While there are certainly legitimate needs for public assistance, it is unfair for Florida taxpayers to subsidize drug addiction. This new law will encourage personal accountability and will help to prevent the misuse of tax dollars.

In Rick Scott's world, unemployment compensation is a stimulus program for drug dealers. Perhaps Scott is projecting his racist views on the unemployed. David Yarian was a former employee of Scott's Solantic health care chain. Yarian told Salon.com that Scott practiced discrimination in his hiring practices.

After the attacks on Sept. 11, Yarian says that Scott phoned him and stated that he should be careful not to hire anyone of Middle Eastern descent because they might scare off customers. At the time, Yarian was willing to excuse the directive as part of the collective shock the country was going through.

In November, though, Yarian interviewed a Hispanic man for a supervisory nurse position. "He was great. He had all the qualities and experience I was after," Yarian says. "But he had a slight accent. When Rick found out, he said, 'Nope. All our employees have to be mainstream.'"

Blogger Joy-Ann Reid expresses doubt that Scott sold his Solantic stock. Many progressives (myself included) feared that Scott would financially benefit from Solantic drug-testing public employees and the unemployed. The media reported that Scott sold his shares to Welsh Carson Anderson & Stowe. Solantic is listed as part of Welsh Carson Anderson & Stowe's portfolio. However, WCA&S have invested in Solantic since 2007. The question is does the S.E.C. have a record of the shares sell?

Florida Senate Passes Anti-Abortion Ballot Amendment

The Florida Senate passed a proposed constitutional amendment banning public and insurance exchange funding. The vote passed by the 27 vote minimum. Unsurprisingly, the deciding vote was Democrat Gary Siplin. Joy-Ann Reid made the observation that Gary Siplin "votes more often with Republicans than any Democrat I've seen."

The law already prohibits state government funding for abortion. What the 2012 ballot amendment will do is rewrite Florida's privacy laws. This has nothing to do with the job creation Republicans promised when they won last year.

This is pandering to the Christian Right base. This is about voter turnout is 2012. Politically speaking, this is going to kill Republicans. Democrats will use the anti-abortion ballot amendment to swing women and young voters for Obama. Abortion isn't gay marriage in 2004. The more conservative South Dakota failed to ban abortion on a statewide ballot. The Florida Democratic Party may not be able to win elections. However, the DNC will be focused on Obama and Bill Nelson winning. Good luck trying to get 60 percent of voters to back an anti-abortion amendment in a state Obama won.

Side note: is Rick Scott and the Republicans in the Florida legislature going to suddenly get more poular and be able to tell women voters they have a right to regulate their bodies? I doubt it.

The Rift Between Obama Democrats & Progressives

It is interesting to see the tweets of Angry Black Lady, Joy-Ann Reid and Shoq attacking progressives for disagreeing with with President Barack Obama's policy. Shoq is anonymous. (Though I suspect Shoq is African-American.) Angry Black Lady and Reid feel an understandable racial connection to the first black president. To place it in proper perspective: in 1961, talking smack about JFK in a Boston Irish pub would probably result in an ass-kicking. Considering the racism directed towards Obama, it is understandable Angry Black Lady and Reid would feel the need to defend the President. Where I get lost is when Angry Black Lady accuses Salon.com blogger Joan Walsh of racism in a tweet war.

Joan Walsh and I had words. Rather than retract her statement about resenting black folks who call themselves "THE BASE" (which I originally took to mean "exclusively" and then asked her who was making such claims), she proceeded to race-bait while accusing the black folks who called her out of race-baiting. Then, much later, she claimed that the Twitter character limit prevented her from using a word other than "RESENT."

Angry Black Lady post a series of tweets that transpired between her and Walsh. I strongly suggest you read that to get context. Walsh wished Obama's policies were more progressive. (So do I.) Walsh wrote that she will support Obama in 2012.

Barring something horrific, I will support President Obama in 2012. (And I read Glenn Greenwald daily, so I know there's a digest of fairly horrific things taking place in the realm of civil liberties, on top of the regular cave-ins to corporate America.) I have explained before: I think a primary race would be distracting and destructive to progressive politics. It would tear the Democratic Party apart in ways that would make that unpleasant 2008 bickering look like a love-in. As the great Michael Harrington used to say, when it comes to electoral politics, I stand on "the left wing of the possible," and that's about where I believe Obama is. So I expect to stand with Obama next year.

Equally important, though, I oppose a primary challenge from the left because I believe it would keep progressives trapped in the fiction that presidential campaigns are the be all and end all of progressive politics. They're not, as Obama's election should have proven to everyone. MoveOn, Dean-turned-Democracy for America and much of the lefty blogosphere went all-in for Obama, lauding him as the true-blue progressive in the race, when he was not. They helped bring him the Democratic nomination he should have had to at least compete for among progressives. (Do people now understand that his praising Reagan and saying Social Security needed fixing might have been harbingers of the way he's led?) They dissipated energy that could have been spent in other ways; progressive groups have spent the last two years trying to figure out how to organize the base for truly progressive causes, rather than allegiance to a centrist Democratic president. Meanwhile, the stunning organizing achievements of Obama for America in 2008 -- building an email list of 13 million names, 4 million donors and 2 million active volunteers -- were never put behind a grass-roots effort to support Obama's agenda. We know from the New York Times that the Bill Daley White House shut down an effort by OFA to back the Wisconsin protests.

Angry Black Lady and Walsh get into heated tweets about the white and black base. The truth is Obama won't win without either. In Florida, blacks and young whites sat out the midterm elections. Republicans won the Florida Cabinet and the U.S. Senate races. Divisive racial arguments between the base will produce President Michele Bachmann or some other nightmare scenario.

Joy-Ann Reid attacked Glenn Greenwald, Dahlia Lithwick, and Jane Hamsher because they disagreed with President Obama's detention policies of terrorists and Bradley Manning. I seriously doubt Reid would defend these policies if George W. Bush was still in office. Reid even accused Greenwald of not being a progressive. Greenwald and Hamsher were critical of Bush's detention policies. It is not surprising they would be equally critical of Obama. The greater issue is the Fifth amendment. We are either a nation of laws or we are not. The damage done to civil liberties extended beyond Bush's tenure and will likely go on beyond Obama's.

There are two camps. Democratic supporters of Obama and progressives. Obama supporters will defend Obama. Progressives would toss Obama aside if they found a more progressive Democrat that was electable.

Reid hysterically exclaimed Obama's lame duck session was "less horrible than advertised." I noted that it is getting harder to put a better spin on Obama's policies. If the economy was booming, Osama bin Laden was captured and employment was at record numbers, there would not be this infighting with progressives and Team Obama Democrats. Angry Black Lady and Joan Walsh aren't racist or the problem. The problem is a decade of bad governing. A second term of Obama or a Republican administration isn't going to change that.

I do wish is Team Obama Democrats stop defending the President violating the Fifth amendment. If Obama is your guy then more power to you. You might feel differently if you are shackled and hooded in Gitmo. You are aware that Obama has the power to declare anyone a terrorist and detain them indefinately. Obama also supports warrantless wiretapping.

Team Obama Democrats remind me of Andrew Sullivan spending years supporting the GOP. Part of what pushed Sullivan away from the Republican Party was the Bush administration torturing detainees. The Obama administration ended the practice of torture. Obama did keep several legally questionable policies.

The role of citizens is to actively question the policies of government. Rooting for political parties or politicians, as if they were a sports franchise, will lead to heartache. Voting for the lesser of two evils is understandable. However, let's not kid ourselves that we will be voting for a Democrat who sold himself out to the Chamber of Commerce. Change only happens when people are engaged in the political process.

Why Solantic Should Not Handle State Drug Tests

Fun fact number one: Rick Scott is the co-founder and owner of Solantic; a chain of health care clinics in Florida.

Fun fact number 2: Solantic provides drug testing.

Fun fact number 3: Scott signed an executive order to have state employees randomly be drug tested. Scott also supports legislation that makes it mandatory for welfare recipients to be drug tested.

"Floridians deserve to know that those in public service, whose salary are paid with taypayer dollars, are part of a drug-free workplace," Scott said. "Just as it is appropriate to screen those seeking taypayer assistance, it is also appropiate to screen government employees."

Joy-Ann Reid pointed out that state workers could provide Solantic with 170,000 more people to drug test yearly. That adds up to a handsome profit. It is troubling that Scott transferred his Solantic stocks to his wife. The proper way of handling ownership of Solantic was to have a blind trusthandle Scott's stocks. Scott's wife can not be seriously considered a neutral third party.

Several former employees of Solantic accused Scott of discrimantion, in hiring practices.

After the attacks on Sept. 11, Yarian says Scott phoned him and stated that he should be careful not to hire anyone of Middle Eastern descent because they might scare off customers. At the time, Yarian was willing to exercise the directive as part of the collective shock the country was going through.

Scott was also against the hiring of overweight or Hispanic health care workers. Scott wanted employees he deemed "mainstream." Yarian was fired after complaining about Scott's hiring directive to Karen Bowling. Yarian was later fired. Yarian won an $80,000 out-of-court settlement against Solantic.

Bowling admitted in a deposition that Yarian complained to her about Scott's discriminating hiring policy, in a deposition.

"He did express concerns that we -- that he didn't believe in the hiring practices, and how do you interpret what's presentable," she said. "And alluded to overweight people."

Other employees have won lawsuits against Solantic. Solantic was caught illegally using the medical licenses of two doctors. Solantic was forced to legally settle with Dr. P. Mark Glencross.

Dr. Randy Prokes accused Solantic of defrauding Medicare. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services stepped in to investigate. It is unclear how the investigation has progressed.

Floridians should ask themselves do they trust their governor on health care issues. Speaking for myself, I am more willing to invest faith in a snake than our governor.

Obama is "Less Horrible Than Advertised'

Poor Joy-Ann Reid. I love her work. Sadly, it is becoming harder for her to defend President Barack Obama. Calling Obama's budget proposal "less horrible than advertised" is not a ringing endorsement. Reid participated in a conference call with the White House and believed the spin. Case in point the administration's defense of cutting the Low Income Heating and Energy Assistance Program funding by half.

On the White House Af-Am call, I asked about LIHEAP, and was told it was one of the “difficult” but necessary cost savings the president was proposing. On the call, Rouse explained that LIHEAP had seen its funding essentially doubled in the president’s first two years due to spiking energy prices. Now that prices have leveled out, the White House has decided to return funding to pre-spike levels. However, Rouse said “rest assured, if energy prices spike again, the White House is prepared to bring funding levels back up.” In a follow-up email after the call, a White House spokesman explained that LIHEAP is in fact a block grant, meaning money transfered to the states and administered by them. And because the money is paid directly to utilities, not customers, with energy prices down but the funding still at spike levels, it has essentially served as a federal subsidy to those energy companies.

Unemployment projections will be high for 2011. The Office of Management and Budget paints a far rosier picture of deficit reduction than OMB director Jack Lew.



Reid writes that the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities gave Obama's buget good reviews. I don't believe that Reid read Robert Greenstein, CBPP Executive Director's statement on the budget.

The President’s budget, however, does not go nearly far enough to keep the debt stabilized in later decades, which the Administration acknowledges. The President and Congress will need to take much bigger steps — on both spending and taxes — to meet those challenges. The budget signals the Administration’s interest in bipartisan discussions on these issues, explicitly calling, for example, for bipartisan talks on Social Security and laying out the Administration’s principles for such negotiations.

Greenstein notes that the White House is wrong on on cuts to LIHEAP funding are practical because heating prices will drop.

One exception is the deep cut in LIHEAP. The President proposes to return LIHEAP to its 2008 funding level on the grounds that home energy prices are much lower now than when Congress substantially increased LIHEAP funding in response to a rise in those prices. But, the Energy Department’s own price forecasts indicate that home energy prices in the winter of 2012 will be back to their levels in the winter of 2008 and higher than in any year since then as well as in the years before 2008. The price of home heating oil is projected to be almost twice its 2000-2007 average; residential electricity almost 30 percent higher, and residential natural gas over 10 percent higher. While these prices will still be lower than at the peak of the price spike that occurred after the winter of 2008, the number of low-income Americans is much higher now— the number of people living in poverty is expected to be about 15 percent greater in 2012 than it was in 2008.

In fairness, Greenstein has good things to say about the budget proposal. Greenstein notes that the current Washington political climate is "toxic." Obama won't get everything he wants but no one expects the President to put up a fight.

Obama's budget calls for letting the Bush tax cuts expire in 2012. Does anyone see Obama doing that in an election year. The 2012 economy isn't going to be Clinton's 1998 economy. Things are likely to still be bad.

It amazes me the best defense Obama progressives have is "less horrible than advertised." Imagine that as a 2012 campaign bumper sticker.

Joy-Ann Reid on Rick Scott

Joy-Ann Reid shares the same thoughts that I had on Rick Scott's budget disaster. Reid shares my sentiment that unveiling the budget at a tea party rally and not to the general public is political stupidity.

He doesn't understand the difference between campaigning and governing. Scott unveiled his budget plan at a tea party gathering. And while that might make Florida's tea party activists feel important, the election is over. Scott is going to have to come to terms with the fact that while he didn't win the majority of Florida's support, he is stuck governing everybody, including people who are not part of the tea party movement. By unveiling his plans at a highly partisan gathering that represents a third of Floridians at best, Scott revealed that he is more interested in positioning himself ideologically than behaving as a statesman.

The problem with Scott is at heart he is scared to death of facing the public. It takes a great deal of political cowardness to, at the last minute, have his mother speak in his place at the Boca Raton Republican Club. Scott has enough problems speaking to a Republican audience. There is no chance Scott will have the courage to discuss his budget in a townhall meeting with moderate voters.

Scott is not a good enough politician to to stage a late rally like President Barack Obama did last December. Obama's Afghanistan and economic policies have been disasters. Polls show the public uneasy about the economy and Afghanistan. Obama has managed to make the public ignore his policy failure through his impressive political skills. Rick Scott has none of Obama's gifts.

Scott's already low poll numbers will sink because he can't sell his policies. I consider that a good thing. The only thing working in Scott's favor is the Florida Democratic Party is so incompetent that they can't stage an effective attack against the Governor. Hint to Rod Smith and Eric Jotkoff: Scott is going to endangers the lives of Floridians by denying organ transplants. Pound that message.

Karen Thurman Quits

DNC chair Tim Kaine released this statement.

“I would like to personally thank Chairwoman Karen Thurman for her steady leadership at the Florida Democratic Party. Over the past six years as Chairwoman, Karen has successfully built the infrastructure and modernized the operations of the Florida Democratic Party. Her focused efforts to empower our party’s grassroots activists will continue to benefit Democrats across Florida. I would like to thank Karen as she retires for her commitment to public service, for the reforms she has made at the party and her career spent fighting to improve the lives of Floridians,” said Democratic National Committee Chairman Tim Kaine.

So much for talk that Thurman couldn't be forced out because her term was not over.

Peter Schorsch and Joy-Ann Reid report the black caucus is less than thrilled about the possibility of Rod Smith becoming the new chair.

The black lawmaker, who spoke to TRR on background, didn’t express support or opposition to Smith, but did point out that Alex Sink’s running mate failed to deliver north Florida for the ticket. “He ran for governor and lost, he lost to Jim Davis in the primary” the lawmaker said. “And then he lost as lieutenant governor to Alex Sink. In my mind, three strikes and you should be out. We need change in the Democratic Party. We need new blood. We don’t want to see the same good old boy system. There are too many smart, diverse people, too many cultures and too much history for all of that to be lost, and to deal with that good old boy syndrome that Rod Smith represents.”

The Panhandle strategy was a massive failure. It appears the Florida Democratic Party needs to lose a few more election cycles before they get serious about running 21 century campaigns.

Alex Sink's Panhandle Strategy

Joy-Ann Reid has an excellent breakdown of what went wrong with Alex Sink's campaign. I like to remark on one point Sink made in her interview with Politico.

In an interview with POLITICO, Sink said the (Obama) administration mishandled the resonse to the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, doesn't appreciate the political damage done by health care reform and argued that her GOP opponent's strategy of trying her to the president did grave damage to her candidacy in the state's conservative Panhandle.

Sink's campaign strategy hinged on winning the Panhandle! Has Sink ever looked at maps of statewide races? The Panhandle is where Democratic campaigns go to die. I got no problems with Democratic candidates going into red areas to fight for votes. It is a good way to make Republican spend their money in areas they don't want to. That is different than Sink thinking she was going to carry red counties.

Inoljt at Redstate.com made a map of how North Florida areas voting in the 2008 election. The bigger the red dot, the more the area voting for John McCain.



Look at that map. There is a total of 3 blue dots. Barack Obama won Florida in 2008, but could not do well in the Panhandle. If Sink thought she could beat Rick Scott in the Panhandle then she is on some fantastic drugs. As a candidate, Alex Sink is no Barack Obama.

Sink wanted to win by defeating Scott in the most die hard Republican areas in Florida. Kendrick Meek's campaign manager Abe Dyk's strategy was to get the votes of 2006 losing candidate Jim Davis. It almost seems like these campaigns have strategy sessions on how to lose.

Bad News For Alex Sink

Joy-Ann Reid is much more plugged in than I am. Reid tweets this bad news about Democratic turnout.

Not hearing good things about Florida turnout. I may have to revise my #FLGov prediction...

The only other cabinet race Democrats have a shot as is Dan Gelber. Polls have been favoring Pam Bondi. We are looking at a Republican sweep of the cabinet races. The Florida legislature may become filibuster-proof for Republicans.

What Is the Florida Democratic Party's Message?

"Meanwhile, as a friend of mine in mediaworld said to me tonight, how could Florida Democrats could so screw things up, when the state party is flush from victory in 2008, has raised tons of the money, which erased the Republican advantage, and when the state party they’re facing are almost all under investigation by the FBI and IRS … including Marco Rubio??? You begin to wonder if Democrats can even play this game… "

Joy-Ann Reid, of The Reid Report.

Peter Schorsch and I both have touched on this. Let me use a sports term. Florida Republicans can ball and the Democrats can't. Republicans will tell voters what they stand for. No one has any doubt that Marco Rubio will cut corporate taxes and is against abortion. Democrats literally run from what they are suppose to stand for. There is the infamous moment of Alex Sink walking away from a question about the health care public option.



Voters want to see candidates stand for something. Rubio has horrible policy positions. Rubio sells being anti-choice and anti-gay as being principled. Florida Democrats let Rubio get away with his unprincipled social positions because they avoid bringing up the subject. Kendrick Meek didn't make gay rights a campaign issue until Charlie Crist supported gay adoption.

The Florida Democratic Party sends out rapid response emails everyday about what is wrong with the Republican Party of Florida. Politically, attacking the opposition is fair game within the bounds of reason. What we aren't hearing from the Florida Democratic establishment is new ideas. Rubio's "100 Ideas" was nothing more than a political gimmick The (false) message voters were receiving is Republicans have proposals. What is the Florida Democratic Party's message besides Republicans are bad. I and other progressive bloggers buy the message. The voters of Florida aren't the Florida Progressive Coalition. The voters need a reason to vote for Democratic candidates.

Quote of the Day

"Now before Clarence McKee and other black Republicans start forwarding this post around, thinking it’s a back-handed endorsement of Jennifer Carroll, allow me to add this: I frankly question the wisdom and character of anyone who would campaign with Rick Scott, a man who might be the most disreputable, despicable, frightening and literally hideous character ever to run for governor of anywhere, since George Wallace had a pulse. Or maybe that Meacham clown in Arizona. I’m frankly embarrassed for Ms. Carroll and for the other black Republicans standing with a man who is arguably, no actually, a crook, and who has spent his entire life fighting to deny health insurance to the young, the old, and the poor. If I was her, I would question whether the access to power is worth it."

Joy-Ann Reid, of The Reid Report.

I'm gonna go out on a limb and say Reid isn't voting for Rick Scott. It is just a guess on my part.

Rubio Has Friends In Low Places

Joy-Ann Reid has a lengthy post on Marco Rubio's rise to power in Florida politics and the role Jeb Bush played as his mentor. Reid details how Bush used political leverage to get the Florida Republican establishment. I think the bigger factor was Jim Greer's heavy-handed method of clearing the field for Crist and Bill McCollum. Neither are the Florida GOP's Senante and gubernatorial nominees. I agree with Reid that Bush has played a huge role in Rubio's career. However, the Tea Party wave and Greer's missteps played the major role. If this was 2008 Rubio would have lost the nomination to Crist and Rick Scott would be laughed out of the governor's race.

Reid does accurately name Rubio surrogates. Rubio's cronies reads like a Hall of Shame. Ralph Arza was arrested for leaving a threatening phone message to Gus Barreiro. Arza's message was more fit for an NWA album than from the mouth of an elected official.

You're nothing but a bitch.
You're a bitch.
You're nothing but a bitch.
God bless you, bitch.
Hey, bitch:
You ain't nothing but a bitch.
You ain't nothing but a bitch.
Brother,
My nigger.

Longtime Rubio friend David Rivera has been investigated by the media for domestic violence allegations. There was the bizarre incident of Rivera's car hitting a mail truck carrying anti-Rivera mailers made by a political opponent. Talking Points Memo has the accident report.

Reid's post is a must-read. Go check it out.

More Marco Rubio Economoc Nonsense: Social Security Edition

Alex Burgos of the Marco Rubio campaign went way off the message by telling blogger and Miami Herald columnist Joy-Ann Reid that Rubio supports privatization of Social Security. Rubio would later run away from supporting privatization of Social Security. Read copies of the emails below and click to enlarge.



Reid explains that Rubio hasn't been honest about his position on Social Security.

Here was my inquiry on February 3rd of this year, regarding Marco Rubio’s view on Social Security privatization, and Mr. Burgos’ on the record response. I was asking Burgos to respond to Texas Rep. Jeb Hensarling’s call to turn Social Security over to the private sector and cutting benefits, so again, the question was specifically about privatizing the program:

Rubio told Neil Cavuto he does not support privatization of Social Security.

RUBIO: Anyone telling you that we shouldn’t touch [Social Security], they are going to play tricky political games, they’re going to go around saying that I’m in favor of privatizing it, or raising the retirement age on current beneficiaries —

CAVUTO: But you are open to privatizing it, sir?

RUBIO: No, I think for that — no I’m not. That time has come and gone.

CAVUTO: What about for young guys like you who could take some of the money and put it in the market?

RUBIO: The problem is that it takes money — it makes it more difficult to balance the system in the long term.

CAVUTO: Do you’d be against it?

RUBIO: Yeah, I don’t think that’s the solution.

Allowing future retirees to invest Social Security taxes into the stock and bond market does nothing to address the funding needs for current or future retirees who wish to stay in the government Social Security Trust Fund. An AARP study found changing over the current Social Security system to private accounts would cost $600 billion - $3 trillion. Recipients of private account would either get less or a negative return. The Wall Street meltdown of 2008 shows how asinine an idea private accounts are.

There are a few factors for conservatives push to privatization. Conservatives hate the successful programs of the New Deal. Interest groups in the financial sector would greatly benefit from the influx of Social Security money into the stock and bond market. Conservatives needed an expert to tell them what they hear They found an unlikely ally in José Piñera.

Piñera was the architect of Chile's private pension plan under the government of Augusto Pinochet. The lattter is noted for abusing the human rights of Chileans. The New York Times reported "3,200 people were executed or disappeared, and scores of thousands more were detained and tortured or exiled." Chile's private pension system was filled with corruption and underfunded by younger workers wisely choosing not to enter the system. To make matters worse, Chile's private retirement system is expensive.

At the moment, the government pays about 5 percent of gross domestic product, or more than it spends for either health or education, on pensions for the poor, payments into a separate military retirement plan and so-called transition and administrative costs. Supporters of the privatized system argue that the state's burden will diminish as older retirees enrolled in the pay-as-you-go system that prevailed here before 1981 gradually die off.

But skeptics point to another developing problem: many young people, who should be enrolling in the system early to accrue maximum benefit, are staying out or paying in very little. Some cannot afford to contribute beyond the obligatory minimum payment, which is 10 percent of wages, while others are either self-employed or have been hired by companies as low-paid independent contract workers and therefore do not have to contribute at all.

"The bottom line is that this system does not work with this labor market," said Andras Uthoff, an economist who is director of the social development division of the United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America here. If trends continue, he added, "only a small percentage of people are going to be able to finance meaningful pensions. What happens then to the rest?"

The Social Security Trust Fund is projected to run out in 2041. Social Security is much more stable than the faulty accounting that is the Department of Defense budget. Conservatives want to trade a retirement fund that has lifted million of Americans out of poverty for a failed banana Republic system. From a fiscal policy standpoint it makes no sense. From a purely cynical profit and greed motive it becomes easier to understand why conservatives want the Chile system.

Side note: the AARP study and reports on Chile's private accounts debunk Milton Friedman's claim that movement Socail Security accounts to private accounts is a "myth."

The Silly Internet

Joy-Ann Reid explains why I am so loved. I miss when Tommy Duncan and I had civil blog wars.

Kendrick Meek Death Watch: No Meek Bounce

The Crist campaign sent internal polling numbers showing Crist in the lead. Peter Schorsch and Joy-Ann Reid received the poll. The polling firm is Frederick Polls. The firm has Democratic politicians and unions as clients.

Charlie Crist 35%
Marco Rubio 34%
Kendrick Meek 17%
Undecided 14%

Reid notes the breakdown Florida Democratic jedi master Steve Schale said Crist needs to win in the general election.

33% of the Democratic vote
33% of the Republican vote
50% of the NPA vote.

I found Schale's post to be pure spin for Kendrick Meek. Schale is a smart guy. However, he is a Meek supporter and should be taken with a grain of salt.

Democrats turned out in a less than stellar numbers for the Meek/Greene primary. Marco Rubio received more primary votes than Meek and Jeff Greene combined. Meek cannot get enough Democratic voters to turn out to defeat Meek. The poll shows Crist at 55 percent with independent voters. Crist can also pull conservative Democrats in the Panhandle. The Panhandle is a lost cause for Meek.

Meek also has less money than Crist or Rubio. According to OpenSecrets.org, Crist has $8,039,870 on hand. Rubio follows with $4,494,981on hand. Meek trails with $2,644,511 on hand. The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee isn't going to drop money bombs on Meek. They know this is a Rubio-Crist race and are going to spend money on protecting Harry Reid's seat and races they can win.

The most damning finding from the poll.

Kendrick Meek appears to have gotten little to no bounce from the Democratic Primary.

Team Meek loves to tell people that Meek win get hot any day now. It is September and he still trails Crist and Rubio. How is this different than January poll numbers?. The answer is Meek's poll numbers are worse. I like to hear Schale and Team Meek explain that.

Low Democratic Turnout in South Florida

Joy-Ann Reid tweeted this bad news for Democrats.

Miami-Dade, Broward and Palm Beach, the largest, most Democratic FL counties, all had turnout <20% on Tuesday.

Democrats are going to need a huge turnout in November. Republican voters came out in mass for Marco Rubio. The GOP Senate nominee received 1,061,836 votes. That is more than what Kendrick Meek and Jeff Greene received combined. Rubio has the potential to help Rick Scott and other Republican candidates down the ballot. Barring a wide stance scandal, Republicans will do well come November.

Update: Post On Politics has a rundown of the counties with the best and worst turnout.

01.) Liberty (67) 51.4 percent
02.) Lafayette (66) 51.0
03.) Jefferson (59) 44.6
04.) Calhoun (61) 39.7
05.) Gulf (60) 39.0

63.) Miami-Dade (1) 17.2
64.) Palm Beach (3) 16.3
65.) Broward (2) 14.7
66.) Osceola (23) 14.1
67.) Holmes (56) 14.1