So after yesterday’s little “gift” (which is basically the same term I use when our dog poops in the house accidentally) in the mail from Robbie Wills, this morning I received an email from Sen. Elliott and it read like this:

On this Memorial Day weekend, I am extremely proud and grateful to all of the U.S. service men and women who have served or are currently serving in our Armed Forces. It is because of the selflessness of veterans and the sacrifices of their families that we continue to enjoy so many of our freedoms today. As we enjoy this holiday weekend, let us remember the reason for the Memorial Day holiday: To honor the lives of those men and women who have died while serving our country. America’s veterans have always had and will continue have my full support. They have never let us down, and I shall always work to make sure we don’t let them down. I hope you will join me in showing your support for our men and women in uniform by attending, the Arkansas Department of Veterans Affairs Memorial Ceremony Monday, May 31,2010, at 10:00 a.m. at the Arkansas State Veterans Cemetery, 1501 West Maryland Avenue in North Little Rock. I will be there and I hope to see you there as well. I wish you all a Happy Memorial Day!

Joyce

While Robbie sends out his crap through his campaign manager no less (did anyone besides me notice that he wasn’t quoted in his own press release?) Joyce would rather recognize the contribution to this great country that has been made by men and women who have made or are willing to make the ultimate sacrifice.  That is just another reason I am voting for Joyce Elliott.

So the real piece of work on the Wills hit piece isn’t the piece itself (which will only serve to increase the ire against Wills — I just can’t imagine who they sent it to in hopes of being effective) it is the press release that went along with it…note to budding campaign staff – anything that you print hoping to go to a select number of people should be assumed to get to EVERYONE.

Young Kyle – I have a message for you — how do you know what Arkansans values are, you hail from Kentucky????

So because I think you may have missed it while living in the Blue Grass State, but here it isn’t a good idea to take on a prospective Congressperson for supporting some of the same issues and same votes that the current Congressperson supported.

I am going to “school” you on this one…pay attention:

You say “Sen. Elliott is rated one of the least effective senators for her inability to find common ground and pass legislation.” ’

By whom?  You? Who Cares?  The link you give is for the Arkansas Assembly.  It has no information about how she is rated.  I would imagine that is becuase she is well liked and well respected by a number of organizations who require her to be effective in her position and her colleagues - after all that is why she IS the MAJORITY LEADER of the Senate.  Dude, if you are going to slander a State Senator you should get your stuff right first.

You say “Sen. Elliott doesn’t support students’ right to lead their own prayers in our schools. ”

No, Senator Elliott is opposed to having students lead other students in prayer.  She probably believes like I do that students should stick to their personal prayers of “Please let me pass this test!” or “Please God, let us win this game tonite.” or “Please don’t let my parents find out I have a hickey on my neck”.  (for those younger folks out there, that was the prayer when I was growing up)

You say “Sen. Elliott believes it is okay for a doctor to perform an abortion on an underage girl without parental consent.”

Wrong again, brainiac.  What would you say if a child who was abused by one or both of her parents went to a doctor and was told she was pregnant?   Go back and get permission from your “parents” to get an abortion?  Are you saying that Robbie would demand that the abused go back to their abuser and seek permission?    Sen. Elliott was making a wise judgement.  In the case of rape, incest and the health of the parent, abortion should remain a legal option.  I am proud of Senator Elliott’s position.  Thanks for letting folks know.

You say “Sen. Elliott supports the radical practice of partial-birth abortions.”

 Wrong again – no one supports late-term abortions (partial term abortion is another one of those republican message machine miss-nomers).  If the question of who do I trust, an elected official or my doctor when making medical decisions, I will trust my doctor.  Now if Robbie has an MD behind his name, then by all means he can make those decisions.  I don’t remember how Dr. Congressman Snyder voted, but I would imagine he had his reasons. Maybe when you aren’t so wet behind the ears, you won’t encourage your candidate to make such brash claims.

So next you go to the gun rights question….well as far as that goes, just give it up.  If Robbie was going to get throught the run-off, the NRA is still going to support the other guy over Robbie because they just don’t support Democrats.  Move on. Show the duck hunting photo on your next mailer and just keep moving….

So you finish with YouTube cuts about trying to define what “negative campaigning” actually is…and Senator Elliott was right when she said that it isn’t negative to talk about positions and people should be held accoutable to theirs.  But if you are going to slander and stretch the truth then you should own that what you are doing is considered negative campaigning.

I will finish by saying that I hope that everyone that gets your piece (by the way, you should learn a little more about targetting – you sent it to me which means you probably sent it to all voters who voted in the primary) has the same reaction that I do – I can’t wait to vote on the first day of early voting for JOYCE ELLIOTT FOR CONGRESS IN DISTRICT 2.

Also just for the record, it says alot that Robbie isn’t quoted in the press release you sent around…did he not want to go on the record himself, or did he want enough of a cover that when he catches flack for this whole episode he can just say “I didn’t know what my campaign manager was doing….”

Bill Halter got some important endorsements this week from some prominent candidates in different parts of the state.

Press Release

Three Arkansas Democratic Primary Candidates Endorse Lt. Governor Bill Halter for the U.S. Senate

North Little Rock — Lieutenant Governor Bill Halter today announced endorsements from three former candidates in the June 8 Democratic Primary Runoff Election: State Representative David Cook of Williford (Sharp County), Patrick Kennedy of Little Rock and Greg Leding of Fayetteville.

“Bill Halter is the face of change for Arkansas and I know he will work to bring more jobs and educational opportunities to our state,” said Cook, a retired school administrator and three-term state legislator from Northeast Arkansas. Cook competed in the primary race for U.S. Representative in the 1st Congressional District of Arkansas.

Kennedy, a former policy director for the Clinton School of Public Service who made his inaugural bid for public office in the 2nd District Congressional race, said: “Halter has proven he is not afraid to take on vested special interests that have had their say for too long in Arkansas and national politics. He is a breath of progressive fresh air.”

“Bill Halter took what had been a limited state office as Lieutenant Governor and led the charge for a bold new college scholarship program that will help thousands of Arkansas students and families beginning this fall,” said Leding, a contract Web designer for Fayetteville Public Schools. Leding won his primary election for State Representative by winning more than 60 percent of the vote in District 92, which encompasses most of Fayetteville in Northwest Arkansas. He has no Republican opposition in the November election.

“We are pleased to have the support of three candidates from three separate regions of the state, all of whom ran aggressive campaigns for elective office,” Halter Campaign Manager Carol Butler said. “The momentum of the Bill Halter for Senate campaign for change on behalf of middle-class Arkansas families continues to build toward the June 8 runoff election.”

Our readers might note that three of the four of these candidates got our endorsement as well. Of course, we have endorsed Bill Halter, but we have also endorsed future Rep. Greg Leding of Fayetteville and Rep David Cook who took third place in the first district race for US congress. While we gave Kennedy his due consideration, we endorsed Joyce Elliott for the second district.

It will be interesting to see if Leding’s endorsement can turn Washington County in Bill Halter’s favor. His loss there on May 18th was cited as a key loss for him along with Pulaski County. However, his better than expected wins in rural areas counter acted these losses. If Halter can use the support from Leding to get over the top in Washington County, Lincoln will have a hard time making up those lost votes elsewhere in the third district, which she won by less than 2,000 votes.

Cook’s endorsement could help Halter sure up a few more votes in the first district which he performed somewhat better than expected on election night. Halter lost by less than 4% of the vote and Cook garnered around 15% in his primary there. Could this help Halter over the top?

A reader sent us a mailer sent out by the Robbie Wills campaign attempting to slime Joyce Elliott.

Essentially, it attacks her for having the gull to support a woman’s right to choose, restricting gun rights, outlawing prayer in schools, and being ineffective in office. Let’s look at each of these issues and the support provided by the mailer…

1. How could any self respecting Democrat be pro-choice?! (*sarcasm*)
2. On gun rights, the Wills campaign cites no votes and provides no support for the accusation besides the NRA. Look, I am pro-2nd amendment, but I really don’t listen to anything the NRA says. There is supporting people who like to hunt and then there is a much more radical agenda out there that the NRA pushes a lot of the time.
3. Now about the vote on prayer in public schools… HB 2971 of 2005 was nonsense. It basically just restated what the US Constitution already states on the issue. It was entirely redundant and unnecessary. HB 2971 died in the state Senate. It seems like the majority in the Senate committee thought the bill was unnecessary, not just Joyce Elliott.
4. The accusation that she is ineffective is laughable. I am sure a perusal of her website would say otherwise. But, true to form, I looked up the link provided by the mailer to “support” the accusation. I typed in the web address and got the following message:
   

   “Your account is not currently logged into your legislative service. Please select the appropriate state and service below to log in. The links in the report will work at that time. If you are not currently a subscriber, click on the appropriate link for contact information.”

   Okay, so no support at all for the accusation, just an error message…thanks! Now who is ineffective again Wills?

Anyway, the point of the mailer is clear. Wills is trying to paint her as an “extremist” while also having those around him claim that HE is the true progressive. His campaign is getting about as nasty and contradictory as Blanche Lincoln’s campaign, and that is not a good thing.

Politico covered President Bill Clinton’s appearance for Blanche Lincoln and essentially outlined Clinton’s argument for why Arkansans should vote for Blanche Lincoln. Here is the essence of the former President’s argument:

LITTLE ROCK, Ark. – Former President Bill Clinton returned to his home state Friday to help a beleaguered ally and delivered a broadside against some of the most powerful interests in the Democratic Party.

“Some of the most powerful interests in the Democratic Party”? Really? What about a former President, a sitting Senator, the entire national and state party establishment, all of her PAC support, her support from outside groups like the US Chamber of Commerce, and her huge battle chest? Again, we see those with the power claim to be the downtrodden underdogs.

Using unusually vivid language to describe the threat against Sen. Blanche Lincoln, Clinton urged the voters who nurtured his career to resist outside forces bent on making an example out of the two-term Democratic incumbent.

He pounded the podium with Lincoln at his side, warning that national liberal and labor groups wanted to make her a “poster child” in the June 8 Senate run-off to send a message about what happens to Democrats who don’t toe the party line.

“This is about using you and manipulating your votes to terrify members of Congress and members of the Senate,” Clinton said in the gym of a small historically black college here.

…

Yet even though he lives in New York now, Clinton, who was governor here for 12 years, sought to prove he still knows how to reach Arkansans. Playing on both local pride and a wariness of outside influence, he suggested voters would be mere pawns for an agenda of party purification if they opposed Lincoln.

“If you want to be used that way, have at it,’ he said to about 200 Democrats at Philander Smith College, speaking without notes for 20 minutes.

Here’s the deal. Bill Halter would not have entered the race if three things didn’t happen in Arkansas. I stress “in Arkansas,” because that is what this race is really about.

Firstly, I have it on good authority that Bill Halter would not be in this race if we (Arkansans) had not begged him to. Quite literally, one of my friends actually got on knees and begged Bill Halter to run for US Senate. Beyond that, we gathered a group of nearly 1000 people, mostly from Arkansas, on facebook through online outreach and held events to let Bill Halter know that there were hundreds of Arkansans who felt strongly enough about him and their abandonment by Blanche Lincoln to fund and volunteer for his campaign.

Secondly, Blanche Lincoln was and still is extremely likely to lose in November. Bill Halter and many Arkansas Democrats realized this. We saw Bill Halter as our best chance to keep the seat Democratic in November. If we want to keep this seat, Bill Halter has to win the primary.

Thirdly, Blanche Lincoln made Arkansas Democrats (as well as Independents) angry. She didn’t do this simply by voting with or against the President or the national Democratic Party. The problem is that she voted against us. That is the problem here. Arkansans would not be voting her out if they didn’t feel like she had put other interests ahead of normal Arkansas working families, not the big businesses and big agri-businesses in Arkansas, but the rest of us. That is just the start.

The best example and most easily seen is her opposition to a public option. People, and you Mr. President, can make this about national groups all you want, but the truth is the opposite. Arkansans overwhelmingly supported a public option (55% to 38%). Blanche Lincoln claimed to support it until she was so far on the fringe, that she pledged to filibuster the entire health care bill over this one issue. At the very same time, highlighting the problem, her website stated that she supported a public option. She did this, I reiterate, as the state and her constituents supported the idea by a +17% margin. That poll was taken after the August town halls.

This isn’t about Blanche Lincoln and the party line. This is about Blanche Lincoln abandoning her constituents, her state party, her most ardent local supporters, and her principles (she previously supported it and her office lied to me personally on the matter) in order to either attempt to save her job (wrong move) and/or to satisfy the out of state insurance companies and other large special interest groups so that they would fund her reelection campaign. She has done this on issue after issue from health care to the environment to financial reform (voted against limiting credit card companies from ripping off their customers). I have heard stories from other Bill Halter supporters (her constituents) about issues ranging from the military to the environment where she lied to their faces before voting against them days later.

The national progressive groups like DailyKos, MoveOn.org, PCCC, and DFA along with the unions came in to support us when we needed them. Since working Arkansans were the ones to convince Bill Halter to run, we needed help to battle an entrenched establishment and an incumbent Senator with a $6,000,000+ battle chest. Sure, we here at Blue Arkansas are progressives and we agree a lot with the national groups, but we also see why Bill Halter is right for the rest of Arkansas. Bill Halter’s work for the free health clinics and the lottery scholarship show that he is willing to take action and fight the establishment and special interests to do what is right for the people of Arkansas. During the time when Blanche Lincoln was abandoning us, Bill Halter was highlighting why we so desperately needed health care reform. While the rest of the establishment in Arkansas was standing against the scholarship lottery, Halter got it passed by letting us decide.

And there we are. What this is really about is Democracy with a big ‘D.’

No one is manipulating us Mr. President, we begged Bill Halter to enter the race. It is in our best interests to elect him. If that happens to send a shock wave through the rest of the Washington D.C. establishment, all the better. They could use a good shock every now and then to keep them on their toes. Isn’t that exactly why we have a Democracy, to have the ability to challenge the already powerful in a peaceful and cyclic way?

Lincoln, smiling broadly after Clinton’s effusive endorsement, picked up where the former president left off, pleading with Arkansans not to take out their frustrations with the political status quo on her.

“My vote in Washington has never been for sale and yours shouldn’t be either,” she said.

And just as Clinton did, Lincoln suggested she was an undeserving victim of a general sense of electoral discontent– and that voters ought not to let such emotions dictate their votes.

“I was raised to learn that you do not use anger and hatred to try and solve your problems,” she said.

With all due respect Senator, we are not resorting to anger or hatred to solve our problem. We are resorting to the ballot box, something I thought all Americans understood. The seat isn’t yours, it is ours. We get to say who keeps it. By the look of things, if we want a Democrat in that seat, it will have to be Bill Halter. And that way, we will also have someone who is representing us and not the special interests.

Hey guys, won’t be any updates from me this weekend.  My grandmother is coming home after a successful surgery and I’ll be visiting with her and family for the weekend.  Consider this an open thread.

 Chad Causey isn’t the only one benefitting from David Cook’s endorsement.  I got word this week that Representative Cook is endorsing Bill Halter in the U.S. Senate race.  How’s that for putting the “no one likes Bill Halter” meme to rest?  And I’ve got to hand it to David Cook, he is an amazing benefit to progressive minded Democrats fighting the good fight here in Arkansas, and we are never, NEVER going to forget that.  David Cook is a Blue Arkansas hero for a reason, and it seems like every time we turn around he’s reminding us why we admire him so much.

Loving these numbers that Kos dug up.

First, Halter has outraised Lincoln this fundraising period to the tune of $777,119.94 to Lincoln’s $552,289.91.  Now there’s still a cash on hand advantage favoring Lincoln, but you see how that’s helped her so far.  (Oh, and a lot of that is earmarked for the general election if I’m not mistaken.)  So far in this race, Halter has spent $835,629 to Lincoln’s $1.7 million.  How’s that for proof that money doesn’t always win elections?

You know what’s even better?  Boozman’s fundraising! 

That is pathetic fundraising for a guy who’s been in Washington for so long and is supposed to be walking to a win this November.  Again, money isn’t everything, but you have to stay competitive.  And if trends hold, this is just one more bit of reassurance that Halter can be competitive in November.

But let’s not get complacent.  Come on, donate to Bill Halter.

This pick came from the rally with Bill Clinton and Blanche Lincoln, while Clinton was speaking:

Kinda sad that even Bill Clinton can’t draw an Arkansas crowd out to see Blanche Lincoln, ain’t it?  Also, the messaging got distracted a bit by the refusal to let reporters near Clinton and the whole Sestak non-controversy Republicans are manufacturing.  Boy, Blanche Lincoln’s campaign sure is snake bit.

Any adult who spends their time making fun of the intelligence of an 11 year old deserves nothing less.

As most of you know, the house passed the compromise DADT repeal yesterday.  (About damn time something was done.)  Vic Snyder was the only yes vote from the Arkansas delegation.  No statement yet from Marion Berry, who has never been a supporter of LGBT issues.  However, Mike Ross put out this little statement:

“I think the current Clinton policy is working and should not be changed.  The Pentagon is also conducting a formal review of the ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ law and its impact on our troops.  Before Congress acts on this issue, we must let the Pentagon complete its study and reach an agreement among military leadership whether a change is necessary.  Just this week, the chiefs of the Army, Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps each asked Congress not to repeal the ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ law at this time.”

Right.  I’ll let Max Brantley’s excellent retort handle this one:

An Iraqi veteran sponsored the repeal, of course, and it’s endorsed by the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Ross prefers guidance from the bigots of the military. He flatly prefers to keep the policy, whiich he says is “working.” If, by working, you mean the U.S. has tossed 13,000 valuable troops from armed service because somebody snitched on their personal life, well, yes, that’s “working.” Ross favors discrimination against gay people on account of their essential being. It matters not a bit how competent and valuable they might be or how separate their sexual identity might be from their workplace. He should be ashamed. But Mike Ross knows no shame.

You have no idea how bad I want to give this guy the Lincoln treatment in 2012.

Great news on the OneTax front-the massive regressive sales tax hike/good public policy destroyer will not be on the ballot this year.  Apparently, the nimrods that were pushing it tried to challenge their own ballot title in Court and then decided not to pursue the effort after being told by the Court that they couldn’t do that.  (Yeah, I don’t get it either.)  On top of that, the weird thing was that the Chamber of Commerce actually played a big role in derailing this nonsense.  I guess they like the corporate welfare arrangements the state doles out to them.  Still, the same people that tried to bring us this travesty are pledging to return, like the monster from a bad horror movie.  Hopefully, Arkansas progressive organizations will take note and kick into high gear for the next effort, when there won’t be so many races on the ballot to distract.  Oh, and while we’re on the subject, what is it with these dipsticks characterizing themselves as progressives?  Really, how dumb can one right wing group get?

This is nice.

The state Pollution Control and Ecology Commission voted this morning to approve an amendment to a state regulation, proposed by Central Arkansas Water, that would prohibit the surface discharge of wastewater in the Lake Maumelle Watershed. It seems simple: keep wastewater out of a drinking supply that supports about 400,000 Arkansans. But CAW and clean water advocates have been trying to get the changes approved by the commission for nearly two years. Commissioners had reservations about setting a state-wide precedent and were trying to balance the interests of landowners, developers and environmentalists.  

It’s a shame that the corporate powers that be managed to drag something that was just plain common sense, not dumping waste into drinking water, out for two years.  More evidence that we need more people powered politics in this state.  Here’s some video, courtesy of the Arkansas Times:

I don’t know Kate Althoff, but I think it might be great to see her run for office someday soon.

It looks like we may finally be getting rid of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, thank God, and the politics of that are starting to play out here in Arkansas.

First off, I’m with Max Brantley on this one.  We’re going to miss Vic!  Snyder has always been a reliable supporter of gay rights and this is no exception.  He’s cosponsoring the compromise bill.  With regards to his successors, Senator Elliott has long been a strong supporter of LGBT issues.  I don’t know what Robbie Wills thinks.

Then there’s Blanche Lincoln.  She’s supporting the compromise.  She’s also facing a competitive primary…you do the math, and just in case you’re bad at figuring I’ll spell it out: don’t buy it.  This is the same person who, when an aquaintance of mine emailed her about LGBT issues before this primary started was told that Senator Lincoln doesn’t support “special rights”.  If Lincoln wins this thing, she’s throw gay people right back under the bus, along with all the other progressivish stands she’s taken in the last few weeks.  Halter, by the way, has said he supports repeal of DADT.  I’ve asked him about it personally once and heard someone else ask the same question at a town hall.

 And then there’s Mark Pryor, who refuses to say where he’s at on the repeal.  His excuse?  He hasn’t seen it.  Yeah, like this is really a hard, complex policy matter.  Keep it up Mark, we’ll remember it in 2014.

From Berry, and Ross?  Nothing yet.  I have no idea what Berry’s going to do.  Of late he’s shown that with his retirement he really doesn’t give a damn about anything but getting Chad Causey elected and tearing down Bill Halter.  A better question though is where do Causey and Wooldridge stand on the issue.  Personally, I think this is a good opportunity for Causey to reach out to progressive leaning voters who may be sceptical of him still, but considering the issue I’m not holding my breath.  If Wooldridge comes out in support of repeal I’m liable to kill over from shock.  As for Ross, yeah I’m betting he’s a no vote.

 Boozman is going to be, of course, a no.  He’ll do whatever his party wants him to do, and right now the leadership wants to oppose anything Obama or Democrats push.  When Bush was President, he was automatically for anything and everything the leadershp and the President wanted.  What do you expect from a complete tool?

Anyway, let’s applaud Max Brantley for trying to get everyone on the record on this.  He’s doing a great job.

Update: Yeah I was right, Boozman’s taking the party line.  But hey, it was a lucky guess on my part right?  No one could have seen that coming…

Taking a closer look at the new poll compared to election night, we see some strange differences.

	BLANCHE LINCOLN	BILL HALTER	UNDECIDED
ALL	44	47	9
DISTRICT 1	51	40	9
DISTRICT 2	35	53	12
DISTRICT 3	44	48	8
DISTRICT 4	46	46	8

Now compare this to election night (as of today):

Looking at District 1, it looks like Halter’s support may be underrepresented in the poll (-7%). Halter’s support also looks underrepresented in the poll in District 4 (-5%).

Halter does significantly better in District 3 in the poll than he did on election night, however that is possibly explained by movement since the primary (+8%).

District 2 is just plain contradictory. Lincoln won that district by 8% on election night, but Halter leads in the poll by 18%. That is a 26 point difference.

Now, compare that to the poll taken right before the primary.

	BLANCHE LINCOLN	BILL HALTER	D.C. MORRISON	UNDECIDED
ALL	46	37	6	11
DISTRICT 1	53	31	3	13
DISTRICT 2	37	43	6	14
DISTRICT 3	46	38	8	8
DISTRICT 4	49	36	6	9

Compared to the pre-primary poll, Lincoln’s performance in District 2 is mind boggling. Halter came from behind in Districts 1, 3, and 4 and outperformed the polls. However in District 2, the only district he was winning in the poll, he lost by a full 8% on election day.

Something is wrong either with the poll in District 2 or something is wrong with the actual vote total in Pulaski County. I would definitely go with the former. But why did the Talk Business poll show the same strength in District 2 for Halter?

	BLANCHE LINCOLN	BILL HALTER	D.C. MORRISON	UNDECIDED
ALL	38	31	10	20
DISTRICT 1	38	29	10	23
DISTRICT 2	38	35	10	17
DISTRICT 3	41	29	8	22
DISTRICT 4	37	31	13	20

How is it that both of these polls showed (and continue to show) District 2 as Halter’s overwhelmingly best district? Something is not right here. What it is, is yet to be determined.

UPDATE: I asked Markos Moulitsas of DailyKos if he could explain the difference between the poll and the vote totals in District 2. He said he could not, but suggested it might have been due to turnout. Obviously, there was the US House Race for District 2, but the more progressive candidates (one who is black) handily beat the less progressive candidates. Joyce Elliott won Pulaski with 52% of the vote. It is hard to understand how turnout in Pulaski county could have been detrimental to Bill Halter, who himself polls great with African Americans.

I could understand a 5 to 10 point difference due to turnout. That could explain Halter’s better performance in Districts 1 and 4, but I have a hard time believing that turnout alone would cause a 26 point difference.