Video courtesy of Newsy.com

pp

Multisource political news, world news, and entertainment news analysis by Newsy.com

If you truly support our veterans, then you have to call for Simpson to be fired. If you support Social Security and the seniors that count on those checks, then you have to call for him to go. Social Security has already become an issue in the AR-01 campaign. Chad Causey should do himself, and veterans/seniors a favor, and call for Simpson to be fired. And other Democrats should follow the same lead.

Did you hear?  Joyce Elliott can’t win.  The reason?  Well, let’s see…there was that one poll from Talk Business/Hendrix that was skewed heavily towards older voters…She’s behind in all the internal polls Republicans release, and Tim Wooldridge showed us that those internals are super reliable…Oh and Tim Griffin had way more money than she did back in June after her competitive primary with Robbie Wills, no word on funds raised and spent since then.

But yeah, the village narrative now is that she can’t win.  Maybe it’s because, you know, she’s not actually campaigning…except she is.  She and her volunteers are canvassing the district aggressively, and she does have a ton of dedicated volunteers, more than any other Democrat running would have had for this race.  She’s been making the rounds in small community after small community in Pulaski County and has been getting pretty good results.  She always makes herself available for interviews (speaking from experience on that one) and she got up on tv in the general election before Tim Griffin did.  So yeah…totally invisible…such a bad campaign.  That’s not to say there haven’t been missteps by the campaign.  They were slow to grasp new media and missed a big opportunity by not letting the press in on the Clinton fundraiser.  But the Joyce Elliott is doomed thing has been blown way out of proportion.  And yet, at the same time, there’s a notable factor that has been swept under the rug in analyses of the AR-02 campaign, and it’s one that’s pretty obvious-the role of race.

We new this was going to be an uphill climb from the beginning.  A big reason why Obama didn’t compete here in Arkansas was the perception that Arkansas wouldn’t vote for him because he is black.  I still think he should have campaigned here and everywhere, but you’d have to be living under a rock not to have heard something racist about Obama, and if you think it’s not wide spread you’re naive.  When the Elliott campaign began, those of us that decided to support her had to address arguments that she couldn’t win because of her race in the initial primary and we had to deal directly with the electability argument in the runoff.  Remember, the people making the argument that she couldn’t win back then would always say it was because she was from Pulaski County…often despite being from Pulaski County themselves.  Yeah, that one was pretty transparent.  That said, the issue of race hasn’t gone away.

Granted, the village narrative doesn’t include it.  Not one of the Arkansas Election Line folks included it in their analysis of the race.  Not Talk Business.  Not The Tolbert Report.  Not the Blue Hog Report.  Seems like a pretty glaring thing to leave out in your discussion of a race where the Democrats have nominated, for the first time, an African American candidate for federal office in a state with an ugly racist/segregationist past.  And it’s not that I’m singling the election line out.  As BHR noted, the National Journal declared the race over and wouldn’t say why.  It’s a common thing, race is something the media frequently shys away from discussing honestly, unless it gives them a chance to talk gushingly about how America is post racial.  (Yeah…how long did that stupid narrative last again?  Oh yeah, until the first teabagger showed up.)  None the less, while they won’t say it, I’d bet every penny I own that every one who as written Elliott off as done so in part based on the notion that a black candidate can’t win this race.  That’s not to say that any of them are racist or any less than well meaning and dedicated to doing what they do right.  It just means that they’re taking the same approach to a touchy subject that the rest of the media generally does.

It’s a shame that we haven’t had a more frank discussion about this since the primary because there are a lot of good points to make about race is impacting the campaign.  For instance, there are a lot of folks on the left that I stay in touch with that are complaining that she’s not hitting Griffin’s soft spots.  Personally, I think she’s being very smart by not swinging the first punch, and if she has to do it she’s going to have to do so in a precise, and well thought out manner.  If she attacks Tim Griffin first, she risks running head first into every nasty stereotype that gets applied to black women.  Think about it.  What are the negative stereotypes applied to black women in our culture?  They’re supposed to be bossy, mean, shrill, etc.  And those subconsciously (and consciously) held myths hold strong in our politics.  Don’t believe me?  Have you paid attention to the shit that gets said about Michelle Obama?  And it’s not just women.  President Obama himself has to constantly come across as “a nonthreatening black man” and always has to be careful when touching on matters of race.  Remember when he was asked about the arrest of Robbert Gates and the storm that set off?  Hell, remember “bitter gate?”  Just saying-there’s a horribly unfair line that African American candidates have to walk in this country, and Elliott so far has been walking it better than most anyone could.

How big is race going to play in the final turnout?  Don’t know and we won’t until the election results come in.  Personally, I’m expecting that Elliott’s going to perform better than the expectations.  That’s not a prediction or a statement of confidence in victory, just a hunch that the final margin will be closer than what the media narrative suggests.  And if I’m wrong…well, I’m just wrong, so be it.  Still, she has…no, scratch that one…we have already done a lot to be proud of in this race.  We stood up to the people in our own party who said we shouldn’t do this because she was unelectable and we told them to fuck off.  We made it clear that the Democratic Party wasn’t going to cave to the prejudices of others.  And the result was that we nominated the strongess possible candidate for this race out of those that ran.  If we had nominated Robbie Wills, we’d be left with a guy who had no good campaign sense, who didn’t excite anyone, and who’d be stuck explaining his role in the state car fiasco.  Adams, Kennedy, and Boling (much as I’ve come to like and respect the later) never got their campaigns off the ground.  Hell, if Vic Snyder was the candidate we’d be demanding that he get off his ass and break his fundraising habits.  But remember, Joyce Elliott is black, therefor by the laws of American politics she was the only one who ever had to answer questions about electability.

So, to wrap this up before I really start rambling, I don’t think this campaign is decided yet.  The media narrative is, but so what?  The campaign is still on, and we’re in this thing to win.  If Elliott pulls off an upset it’s going to be a huge thing.  And if she loses, then we still made progress.  There will be a day when African American candidates in Arkansas aren’t unusual.  There will be a day when there are more women in office in this state.  There will be a day where we see candidates in this state who are Hispanic, Asian American, Jewish, gay, you name it, and the Joyce Elliott campaign is a huge step in that direction-the right direction.

In the meantime, if you’re sick of the media narrative like I am, why don’t you give Joyce a helping hand in making the talking heads spin around a bit.  You can start by donating to her campaign via our ActBlue Page.  And if you’re in the second district or will be free to help out you could always volunteer for her campaign.  Forget the narrative.  We’re in this to win, and we’re standing up for Joyce.

(And now that I’ve mentioned the AR-02 race, our favorite troll BurnNotice should be along in five…four…three…two…)

Bill Clinton’s back in Arkansas and, for once, isn’t blasting labor unions and hard working progressive activists as outsiders trying to manipulate Arkansans. (Yes, I’m still bitter about that bullshit.) But for whatever Clinton’s faults, he’s still the big dog, and as we saw in the primaries having him on your side in Arkansas is generally a plus.

That said, it was nice to see someone in the party stick it to Tim Griffin over his ethical issues-

There’s a lot of interesting things in that interview, and yeah, the Elliott campaign made a dumb move in not allowing the press into the fundraiser. Still, the bigger mistake on the part of Democrats is not aggressively attacking Tim Griffin. I understand why Elliott herself hasn’t done so, more on that later, but the Democratic party in this state as a whole really needs to develop a backbone and start hitting the Republicans hard.  Don’t worry about the whole negativity thing-no one really cares about that and Democrats should have learned that long ago.  Just tell the truth and don’t back down.

Oh and this Clinton thing the party establishment is counting on so much, that only helps if they’re putting him in radio and tv ads or getting him to do high profile appearances out on the stump.  Of course, aggressively pushing a message that resonates would help more…You know what they say about putting your eggs all in one basket.  But I digress.

Oh and you know how you can tell how Griffin’s ethics issues could be devastating if Democrats spread the word?  A) The Griffin campaign had no response to what Clinton said and B) his supporters squeal like stuck pigs every time you mention it.

(Credit where credit is due: The video was shot by Jason Tolbert.  My apologies to Jason for failing to cite that initially.)

I had limited computer access yesteday so I didn’t get around to laughing at how boring John Boozman is in his new ad. However, I got on late last night and found the said ad removed. As it turns out, Boozman got in trouble for using the Razorback logo in the ad and had to pull it. Thing is, he apparently lied about pulling it and the ad is still running. And yeah, it’s running with the unedited Razorback footage.

Anyway, take a look at the edited version-

Snoozman is living up to that nickname…Seriously, if Lincoln hadn’t have such self inflicted damage, she’d be flooring this guy.

Good ad, and accurrate. After all, Crawford himself calls for the privatization of social security on his facebook page and his flip flopping on the issue has been documented earlier in the year.

Causey needs to keep this up. I’ve been frank about my lack of enthusiasm for him as a candidate of late, and frankly, I don’t think I’m alone in that feeling. Chad doesn’t excite people and he’s gotten as far as he has because of his connection to Berry and his being perceived as the lesser of two evils. But to win, he’s going to need to set the terms of the debate. 9 times out of 10, you can tell who’s winning and losing by who’s framing the debate. To beat Crawford, Causey’s got to put him on the defensive, and he’s got to get Democrats excited about him. The best way to do that at this stage of the game? Beat Crawford like a drum.

There are several other things that Causey can turn into arrows in his quiver. If he wants to make social security an issue he ought to call Obama to fire Alan Simpson. That’s criticism of the President I could live with. And hell, it’s not like we haven’t tested out the name “Big Oil Rick” around this neck. And hey, test out Crawford’s commitment to eliminating the deficit-call for the end of the Bush tax cuts for the rich. There’s a host of issues that Causey can raise to set the debate and put Crawford on the defensive. If he doesn’t want to fall victim to the enthusiasm gap that’s terrorizing Democrats this year, he’s probably going to have to raise every single one of them.

Hey guys, I’ve got a big announcement to make here. Blue Arkansas’s readership has grown enormously since we started this thing and we’re having a real impact on Arkansas politics. Now we’re kicking it up a notch, and I think ya’ll are going to like what we’ve been working on here.

We’ve extended invites to several major Democratic candidates-Shane Broadway, L.J. Bryant, Joyce Elliott, Pat O’Brien, Chad Causey-asking them to join us for live blog sessions where the candidate will sit down and talk directly to you the Blue Arkansas reader. We’re still ironing out the details, but hopefully we’ll be announcing who will be doing the first live blog soon and the date and time. Through the live blog sessions, you’ll be able to ask the candidates questions, share your concerns, and see how they react to people one on one.

Again, we’re still working on the details for this one and nothing is definite as of yet, but if it goes well we may see about inviting even more candidates! We’re making Arkansas history in a big way here. This will be the first time, to my knowledge at least, that Arkansas politicians live blogged with Arkansas voters on a site focused on Arkansas politics. Stay tuned!

Reading TPM today about Blanche Lincoln’s election prospects was a little revealing about the disconnect between what’s really going on here on the ground and how people outside the state perceive us. First there was the article attempting to explain why she was fairing so poorly-

How did things get so bad for Blanche? She was first elected to the Senate in 1998, defeating Republican Fay Boozman (brother of her current opponent) by 55%-42% in then-President Bill Clinton’s home state, one of the last Southern states to still hold to the Democrats as their natural party for most offices. Lincoln won re-election again in 2004 with 56% of the vote. But this year appears like it could be very, very different. Indeed, the situation is so serious that the state’s favorite son, former President Bill Clinton, is headed to Arkansas this Wednesday to campaign for Lincoln.

Since Lincoln’s first election, the state has been trending more and more Republican at the federal level. While Democrats continue to dominate state and local office, the state has also voted Republican for president in the last three straight elections — including a whopping 59%-39% for John McCain in 2008. And distrust of the national Democratic Party might now be coming home, especially in a cycle that’s sure looking good for Republicans.

Lincoln was also significantly damaged by the spirited challenge she received in the primary from Lt. Gov. Bill Halter. Lincoln won by only 52%-48% — and only after Halter had forced a June 8 runoff by taking 42% of the vote in the May 18 primary. That meant three extra weeks of Lincoln getting hammered from the left by Halter, who received strong support from labor unions. Lincoln’s opposition to a public option during the health care debate hurt her with progressives, and her final position — opposing a public option, and helping to pass the final bill that was signed by President Obama and did not include the option — may have served to alienate voters on both the left and the right.

I want to say this first and foremost. Lincoln wasn’t hurt by her challenge from Bill Halter, she was hurt by her own failure to respond appropriately to it. If she had used the primary challenge to retool her campaign and used the window between her primary victory and the fall campaign to reconnect with progressives she could have recovered, but she didn’t, and it’s due to her own failings rather than Halter’s primary challenge that she’s faring so poorly. There are bound to plenty of Arkansas establishment types that will try to pass Lincoln’s loss off on Halter and use it as an excuse to try and keep progressives in their place, when the reality is that we were trying to save the party from itself but they worked their asses off to elect someone who was DOA come November.

There’s something else missing in that analysis. No matter how far right Lincoln (or indeed any other Democrat) tries to run, it doesn’t seem to help them. Ask Chad Causey about that one…The Blue Dog playbook says that running to the right should help in the rural areas of the state, but that’s where Lincoln got her clock cleaned in the primary. In other words, the days where Democrats could run right in states like Arkansas to win are over. It’s time for a new playbook, and the near victory by Halter that came despite the party establishment’s successful effort to save Lincoln’s defeat for the fall, showed us that the future of the party is progressive populism.

In another article, TPM says something else that’s pretty revealing-

Rep. John Boozman is a popular former Razorback who has maintained a lead all year.

That’s all the article says about Boozman. Did you know he was a former Razorback? Do you even care? I didn’t and I don’t, and I suspect most Arkansans don’t. The truth is that most Arkansans don’t know Boozman. Any other candidate would be beating him like a drum right now, but Lincoln is so distrusted that she’s way behind a candidate that no one should be losing to.

There’s a big lesson to be drawn from the looming Lincoln defeat. Running to the right and voting against their constituents economic interests won’t save Democrats anymore. The base can’t be taken for granted any longer, and Harry Truman’s old adage that a real Republican will beat a fake one every time is ringing truer and truer.

It’s not that America suddenly lost it’s collective shit and decided to go running back to the Republicans, it’s that the crazies are motivated and our side isn’t.

The survey shows that among likely voters — based on their interest and past voting history — 49 percent prefer a Republican-controlled Congress while 40 percent want one run by Democrats. Among those expressing a high interest in voting, that GOP lead increases 18 points, 53 percent to 35 percent.

Among all registered voters, however, both parties are tied on the generic ballot, 43 percent to 43 percent, suggesting that Democrats could potentially blunt GOP gains in November with high turnout at the polls.

But right now, according to the poll, the interest level in the midterms is down among Democrats, African-Americans and younger Americans compared to 2006, when the Democratic Party won control of both the House and Senate.

If Democrats lose control of Congress, Hart argues, it’s “because they didn’t vote.”

Poll after poll pretty much confirms that same analysis. The right is motivated because they’re out of power and they think the black guy in the White House is going to institute Sharia Law, sign grandma up for a death panel, eat them, or some other stupid bullshit. To be fair, these are the people who get orgasmic over a guy like D.C. Morrison-doesn’t take much to get them stirred up. With our guys though it takes a little more work to get them excited.

The problem has multiple layers. The demographic groups that were part of the Obama coalition, notably young voters and minorities, aren’t inclined to turn out in off years-something I think will change as those groups become increasingly important in deciding elections in a pluralistic nation. But more significant is the fact that after two election cycles where the base worked our asses off to get Democrats elected with such high expectations, Democrats let down their base again and again. The list of progressive policies that got thrown under the bus thanks to Blue Dog meddling and White House complicity is extraordinary-Cram Down, EFCA, the public option, climate change legislation, a clean energy bill, a moratorium on offshore drilling, comprehensive immigration reform, ENDA, DADT,etc. These are all things that could have been done this cycle. Tie that in to the timidity to do anything that will actually revitalize the economy and the willingness to play footsie with Republicans on tax cuts and “entitlement” cuts, not to mention the party establishments efforts to protect the worst kinds of Democrats from the base’s efforts to hold the party accountable and the frequent rounds of hippy bashing and yeah, Democrats have set themselves up for disaster.

I’d ad one more factor into all that, and it’s limited to Arkansas in it’s scope. Remember, in 2008, Obama failed to campaign here and Democrats, despite the impressive gains of the party in 2006, failed to stay connected. By being absent, Obama gave Arkansans no reason to abandon racist stereotypes and right wing myths, no reason to trust him or get to know him. And when certain members of the party (and we’ve all met at least one person in our day to day lives who have said this or something similar) say that Arkansas isn’t sophisticated enough to vote for Obama or that Obama couldn’t have done any better if he campaigned here, it sends the wrong message-it says that Democrats think Arkansans are stupid or worse, and when Democrats run right or twist and turn on the issues like Blanche Lincoln has, it reinforces that message by transparently insulting the intelligence of Arkansans.

Now all that is not to say that this year is a lost cause. I’m of the opinion that when the dust settles, we’re going to find that things aren’t as bad for Democrats as we thought they were going to be. But until that point, we’ve got to get every Democratic voter out. This year didn’t have to be a bad year for Democrats, but if we’ve got to defend our turf, so be it. And when it’s all said and done, no matter how bad the year turns out to be, progressive activists will step up again and continue the fight.

You really can’t talk about Arkansas politics in detail without discussing Jerry Cox and the Family Council.  The most active and powerful right wing institution in the state, the Family Council’s activism has filled the gap that the incompetent Republican party has left with their inability (until now?) to become a major force for the social conservative element in this state.  Because of the Family Council and the fear they inspire in more timid Democrats in the state legislature (and loyalty in the likes of Democrats like their BFF Tim Wooldridge) the organization and it’s leaders, Jerry Cox, have managed to stop any significant legislation that would benefit women, pushed anti-gay hate legislation onto the ballot, and a host of other slimy activities.  For the longest time they looked invincible, until Bill Halter’s lottery campaign inflicted a mortal wound.

For the longest time, Cox and the rest of the religious right in this state have sided with outside gambling interests to keep a state lottery dead in the state legislature.  But when it made it on the ballot, they were soundly defeated.  They’re still upset about it too, but they’re not getting anywhere with their opposition-

The religionist bullies of the Family Councilhave sent a letter to several retail chains (not including Walmart or Kroger) attempting to warn them off installing lottery vending machines. They proclaim that the “tide is turning” on the lottery and they expect the legislature to outlaw the vending machines in 2011. I’m not so sure.

An overwhelming majority approved the lottery. Its popularity has only grown with the millions passed out for college scholarships. I’m no lottery fan. But forget about half-measures. If the lottery is to continue to produce the return expected, the grim reality is that it has to be marketed to the maximum.

The bullies got 1,200 people who said they oppose lottery machines. Big whoop — 648,122 voted for the lottery.

Cox and his supporters in their quixotic campaign against the lottery are complaining that the voice of “the people” is being ignored.  No, the people in state government can just count and have figured out that 600,000+ is a greater number than a measly twelve hundred and have decided to go with the people rather than with a fringe group.  The political rottweilers have become yappy little chihuahuas and aren’t taking to the change very well.

Whatever your thoughts on the lottery, and it’s not an issue that cuts clearly across the spectrum, it has shown the entire state that Jerry Cox doesn’t always get his way and can be beaten when there is a counterpoint raised to Family Council lies.  The Council and their conservative allies can bitch about gambling all they want, but they’re not willing to pay the higher taxes to invest in higher education and the future of the state-when that was made clear by Bill Halter’s campaign, the vast majority of voters sided against Cox.  Since then, he’s been in a pathetic scramble to reframe the debate, going from “Stop the lottery!” to “You’re doing it wrong!” with several steps in between.  And the best thing is that no one is listening to him and no one cares what he and the Family Council have to say anymore on the issue.

But there’s something else happening on the Arkansas political terrain.  Remember, the teabagger group Secure Arkansas was originally looked at by Cox as an ally for the Family Council.  (Because Jesus hated anchor babies don’t ya know.)  But due to their own incompetence and the ridicule the group has been subjected to of late for its insane beliefs (glad we could help on that by the way), Secure Arkansas is currently on life support.  Ad to that the bizarre flat tax/Jim Keet advocates that even call themselves “Progressive” Arkansas (that, like Secure Arkansas, failed to get their pet cause on the ballot) and there’s an interesting trend developing.  Conservative organizations in this state aren’t doing so hot, and it’s happening in a year when Republicans are widely expected to make gains and progressives are rather unenthused.  For whatever reason, conservative interest groups seem to be failing miserably.  There are probably a lot of reasons for that, but my guess is that it’s largely because, despite the unbridled anger of the teabaggers and the frustration with the economy, there just isn’t a strong place for the conservative political movement of old on today’s political landscape.  One would expect that considering that America is increasingly a pluralistic society, but one would think that these groups would still be going strong in a state like Arkansas that is behind on the demographic trends.  That they’re not is pretty telling.

Next year we plan on going toe to toe in the state legislature with the Family Council and other right wing groups, and we’re going to be enlisting you in our efforts.  We’ll provide you with contact info for state representatives and senators, count the votes, tell you who’s on the fence and needs a phone call or an email, and those that carry the water for Jerry Cox and the like, Democrat and Republican, won’t be able to hide in their little committee rooms from the public eye.  So yeah, I’m itching for this fight and I’m looking forward to seeing progressive activists throw dirt on the political grave of the Family Council.

I’ve got to hand it to Senator Lincoln, she hit the ball out of the park on this one.

In the ad, Lincoln rightly hits Boozman for his “Fair Tax” proposal, the irony being that there’s nothing fair about the tax at all.  The tax plan replaces not just the income tax but all federal taxes and replaces the whole code with a massive sales tax, which I might note will probably have to be a lot more than just 23 percent.  The Republicans of course love this idea.  Via Tolbert-

Her ad hits Rep. John Boozman for his support of the FairTax plan.  She says that he supports a 23 percent national sales tax on everything you buy.  Of course, anyone familar with the FairTax knows in reality this replaces all federal taxes included the income and payroll taxes, include a prebate, and is expected to greatly reduce the tax burden on everyone.

There are of course a few facts that Tolbert leaves out.  (Which is becoming a bit of a pattern.)  The first of course is that the sales tax is a regressive tax.  Poor, working, and middle-class Americans spend far more of their money at the grocery store than wealthy Americans, who will be able to accumulate wealth in stocks and bonds outside the scope of the tax.  Besides, it should be pretty obvious that 23+ cents on every dollar is a lot different to someone making 30k a year than it is to someone making 1 million or more.  The net result is, the rich get richer and the rest of us are screwed.

But the other thing that Jason fails to mention when he talks about the lowering tax burden on everyone is that the plan won’t do anything about state and local taxes.  In other words, we’d have the Arkansas sales tax (and other taxes) plus the national one, which would make taxes unbearable on almost everyone in the state, save the wealthy.  In other words, the state then finds itself with either a heavily regressive tax code that works to trap a large segment of the population in dire economic straints while exempting an increasingly wealthy and powerful few or it cuts its own throat and greatly reduced it’s tax burden which then cuts and eliminates government services essential for the state to function properly, which again, in the long run, hurts the state’s economy.

In short it’s a bad plan, and I’ve got to praise Senator Lincoln for hitting Boozman on it.  I’ve been saying for a long time that Democrats need to take this idea on from a progressive frame work and Lincoln did everything I’ve said we needed to do.  In short, I’m impressed.  (Yeah, I never thought I’d say it either.)  Lincoln missed a lot of opportunities over the course of the summer to reconnect with the base that fueled her challenge from Bill Halter.  If she wants to make up what looks to be an enormous gap between herself and Boozman, her only option left is to remind us all why Senator Boozman is just plain unnacceptable.

By the way, did anyone else know that Max Brantley constitutes the “extreme left” these days?  We keep moving that spectrum over and Mussolini’s going to be a centrist before we know it.

You may have read Paul Greenberg’s write up about Labor Day in the Sunday edition of the D-G, entitled “A Labor of Love”.  If you didn’t, all you missed were little nuggets like these-

On this Labor Day weekend, like most Americans, I come to praise labor, not indulge in it.  has there ever been a people that speechified more about the joys and satisfactions of work and the work ethic, yet was so enamored of labor-saving devices?

***

Much like economics itself, the American attitude toward labor can be a curious paradox: simultaneous admiration and distaste for work.  Surely no other civilization-if that’s the right word for this American experiment, hurly-burly, and adventure-has labored so hard to make labor obsolete, or at least optional.

***

Americaqns long have sought to avoid the kind of labor that demeans: dull, rote, repetitive, unthinking and literal as the workings of a computer, the kind of brutish labor that will follow binary orders right out the window.  But we never seem to tire of the kind of labor that elevates and exands the human consciousness, that approaches a craft or even art.

Whether it was the Shakers in their neat little colonies full of music and workmanship (‘Tis a gift to be simple, ‘Tis a gift to be kind…) or Jefferson at Monticello, Americans have long been fascinated with labor-saving devices.  Inventing and perfecting them remains our favorite form of labor.

***

Naturally a day of rest has been set aside to honor labor.  If we really loved work, we’d be working-not picnicking and taking that last dip in the pool.

Okay, I can’t torture myself with anymore of that crap.  Seriously, the man is babbling!  Beyond that, Labor Day isn’t a celibration of “the work ethic” or anything like that and as Labor Day is one of the holidays I appreciate the most, and since Greenberg never misses a chance to rattle out some true meaning of Christmas story every time he’s feeling irrate about the phrase “happy holidays” or some other such slight to all things religious, I thought I’d point out that Labor Day isn’t a celebration of working or just a day to relax and miss school or work, it’s a day set aside to show respect and appreciation for what working man and women have done and continue to do for us, and it’s a day that was born out of bloodshed.

Labor Day in the United States came about after the Pullman Strike of 1894, a series of nationwide strikes that started with 3,000 employees of the Pullman Palace Car Company protesting a reduction of wages, eventually involving 250,000+ workers in 27 states at the height of the strike.  It was then that President Grover Cleveland sent in an army of some 12,000 soldiers to break up the dispute.  Yes, the United States, that defender of freedom, that shining city on a hill, sent its army in to fight its own civilians for demanding a decent wage.  After the ensuing violence and bloodshed, the pro-big business Cleveland, no doubt in a state of panic, pushed the creation of Labor Day to appease workers across the country.  It wasn’t the last time though that the blood of American workers would be shed by the combined might of big business and the American government though.

The 1921 Battle of Blair Mountain stands out as another example of the struggles that union workers have fought in this country, where the blood of workers was shed for the rights and privileges that Americans enjoy so casually today.  In West Virginia, coal miners had organized to fight exploitation and unsafe working conditions (sound familiar?) and were greeted with an army organized by the anti-union sheriff, Don Chafin, that even dropped bombs from airplanes on the union men.  President Warren Harding sided against the union workers, sending in federal troops.

Those are just two examples of the blood shed and the sacrifices made by union workers fighting for all that we take for granted today.  Were it not for organized labor, we wouldn’t enjoy the benefits of the eight hour work day, the forty hour work week, child labor laws, the weekend, the minimum wage, safety regulations, overtime pay, unemployment insurance, Social Security, etc.  The bottom line is, America would not be the place it is today were it not for men and women who fought for the right to organize and for wages they could live off of and a work place they wouldn’t die because of. 

You’ll never hear those stories from Paul Greenberg.  Remember, to him, labor unions are just another blight on America, a dangerous and greedy special interest.  Instead of telling us about the benefits of unions, he, Bradley Gitz, David Sanders, and other conservatives would much rather lie about how much autoworkers make.  (Yes, the stories about auto makers making $70 an hour are a lie.)  You won’t hear about these things from conservative politicians either.  Remember, unions are outsiders and extremists that want things that will hurt Arkansas like the public option and the Employee Free Choice Act!  But remember, while you’re enjoying your holiday…and the weekend it’s extended…that workers fought and died to give it to you.  Remember that all the things you have, from the grill you’re cooking those burgers on to the truck with the cooler full of beer in the back, are the products of workers.  Be thankful.  And I don’t mean yellow ribbon on the car, red white and blue t-shirt thankful…I mean stand up with workers and support them when they’re fighting for reasonable wages and benefits, safe and decent working conditions, respect on the job, and yes, the right to organize.

And to all the union members out there and to hard working Americans everywhere…to those who gave so much in the past for what we now enjoy and those who labor on in the present…we at Blue Arkansas thank you for everything.

How do you know your opponent has no ammunition?  This line coming out of the D-G’s piece on the Land Commissioner’s race Sunday is rather telling, where John Thurston uses the only arrow he has in his quiver against L.J. Bryant-

“I believe our spending habits would be different,” Thurston said, pointing to the $62,501.14 Bryant lent his campaign during the primary.  “L.J. obviously doesn’t have a problem spending money.  If that is how he runs a campaign, if that is how he spends money, I’d hate to see what he’d do in office.”

Yeah, using your own money to finance your campaign and having reckless spending habits in office…yeah, those two are the same…

It’s not that Thurston has a problem with self funders though.  From the same article-

Thurston lent himself $4,800 at the beginning of the campaign and has begun repaying himself.

In other words, if Thurston had more money to put into his campaign he’d do it, and the way the current campaign finance system is arranged I don’t begrudge him that anymore than I do L.J.  Anyway, chalk this up to one more in the list of races where Republicans have got nothin’ on the Democratic candidate.

Today the D-G did a little piece about the end of major combat operations in Iraq in the editorial page.  Needless to say, the paper that spent eight years praising Bush’s “leadership”, repeated every lie the Bushies spat out, and attacked the good sense and patriotism of anyone who dared object to the war, had little good to say about President Obama.  Apparently because he alluded to domestic politics in his speech to the nation last week he failed to be a statesman.  Yes, because mentioning that the nation is weary due to the problems with the economy briefly and using the fact that the war is coming to a close as an example to assure worried of how we can make it through any problem is sooooooo unstatesman like.

But anyway, I’m not expecting Paul Greenberg and co to be fair to Obama.  No one should considering their track record.  But there was a line in that editorial that concerned me big time-

Now the central front in this long war, whatever it’s finally called in the history books, shifts to another theater.  May it be marked by other victories, whether a president dares call them that or not.

There’s so much wrong with that statement I’m not sure I can do it justice.  First off, there was no winning in Iraq anymore than there will be in Afghanistan.  At one point, we could have gotten Osama Bin Laden and shut down Al Qaeda in Afghanistan and called it a victory.  That changed after Bush lied us into Iraq and the whole dynamic changed.  Al Qaeda turned from an orgainized crime syndicate into a movement and we found ourselves fighting a guerrella war against countless enemies that sprung up as a result of our actions and inactions.  The net result was a war in which no side could win.  That was the war in Iraq, and the war in Afghanistan may mimic it in that nature, but they are not the same war or part of the same overarching conflict.

As much as the editorial writers of the D-G would like to hold to their Neo-Con world views, they have been soundly descredited and are now continuing on in a rather pathetic state of denial.  There can be no “War on Terror” because you cannot defeate “terror”.  Else what we have is a war without end, which is pretty much what neocons would like to have.   Terrorism is a matter to be dealt with by policing and international cooperation, not by bombing third world countries back into the stone age.

But what’s really scary is the implication that the writer thinks there will be other “theaters” beyond Afghanistan.  Unless you’ve been living under a rock the last few years you should know what they’re talking about-Iran, Syria, Lebanon, Libya…There vision is that of an imperial America on the march, country after country, war after war, all because of what a stateless terrorist organization did long ago, a terrorist organization that will only be vindicated in the minds of many around the world if we continue with Bush-like war policies in the future as the D-G would have us do.  Remember, the editorial writers at the Democrat Gazette-Paul Greenberg, Bradley Gitz, Mike Masterson, etc.-who cheered on this war are all part of the same right wing media machine that includes the likes of Fox and Rush Limbaugh.  They, like the rest of their ilk, sold the war at every turn, repeated every lie, and attacked every dissenter.  We could have ended this long ago and saved countless lives were it not for the right wing media’s cheerleading and the mainstream media’s cowardice and timidity when it came to fact checking.  Now the folks running the D-G think we should keep this fool’s errand going past Afghanistan?  How many deaths are Paul Greenberg and his like willing to be complicit in due to their cheering on a misguided cause?  How much blood are they willing to have on their hands in endless wars without end because they couldn’t come down out of the neocon fantasy world?  They may object to that being said, but it’s the end result of their lies and warmongering.

Apparently I’m not the only one who noticed that Jim Keet’s campaign has crashed and burned, whether or not Keet and the Republicans believe it or not…

From the moment it happened, I knew the metaphor was entirely too easy but that I would prove unable to resist.

This column was writing itself. It was doing so all over the floor of Republican gubernatorial candidate Jim Keet’s campaign headquarters.

Keet was reeling from reports that he hadn’t paid all his taxes. He was angry about a newspaper headline that overstated that he was blaming his wife.

So what he did before his news conference began was call his wife, Doodie, to the front. Then he retrieved from the side room a 39th anniversary cake. Then he accidentally turned the cake upside down on the floor as he carried it toward her.

You can imagine the quips emanating from press row. Here’s one: “That cake looks like it got thrown under the bus with Doodie.”

The metaphor is that Keet’s campaign is pretty much smashed on the floor, too.

He was in the untenable position at this news conference of essentially arguing that his nonpayment of property taxes on his personal airplane was but a diversion, not a real issue, not a big deal. Hey, he said, he got current on property taxes as soon as he learned — from the press — of his obligation. He said he wrote a check for about $2,000.

And he was mad, transparently so, though not at himself. He was peeved at Gov. Mike Beebe for, or so Keet alleged, hiring a private investigator to look into such things.

Beebe doesn’t like that phrase — private investigator. He says “opposition research” is common.

Here you have a wealthy businessman just returned to Arkansas from Florida and offering himself as the Republican candidate for governor. He presumes to say he knows better than Beebe how to run the state. Yet he was in arrears on some of his local taxes.

Burn baby burn.

The Blue Hog Report found something interesting on Beth Anne Rankin’s facebook page…

As BHR’s Matt says-

Excuse me, but…what?  You can’t tell people who think it is “AWESOME!” that you are going to be in Mena, AR, where you might be found in Mena, AR?  Why?

Looks like Rankin’s transformation into a Sarah Palin wannabe wasn’t just a matter of looks…