Did you vote today? I did…

I went in to vote for the first time in New York city. I hadn’t been registered or living in the county long enough to get the opportunity. The first thing I notice going into the local church in my hood is the 800 pound battleship grey machines lined up for the voting. Wow, these things have to be nearly 100 years old.

NY is one of few states still using mechanical lever voting machines. Some quick research with the NYTimes reveals, NYC has 7,295 machines and NY state has over 12,000 similarly antiquated machines elsewhere in the state. There was a federal requirement that all lever voting machines be replaced and retired by 2006, however, its obvious that my district hasn’t complied with the requirement.

When you walk in to the New York closet size machine booth, you’re immediately presented with all your voting options on a forward facing white panel (pic below). There are no instructions in or around the booths, so I guess these things have been around so long, everyone in NY inheritantly knows how to use them. I go though my options and plug those candidates I’m taking this year. Finally to make my options permenint, I pull the giant slot machine lever and there ya go…

Let’s see how the dems play out in this race…

After Pat’s Birthday

Originally Posted on Oct 19, 2006 on Truth Dig

Pat Tillman (left) and his brother Kevin stand in front of a Chinook helicopter in Saudi Arabia before their tour of duty as Army Rangers in Iraq in 2003.
Pat Tillman (left) and his brother Kevin stand in front of a Chinook helicopter in Saudi Arabia before their tour of duty as Army Rangers in Iraq in 2003.By Kevin Tillman

Truth Dig Editor’s note: Kevin Tillman joined the Army with his brother Pat in 2002, and they served together in Iraq and Afghanistan. Pat was killed in Afghanistan on April 22, 2004. Kevin, who was discharged in 2005, has written a powerful, must-read document.

It is Pat’s birthday on November 6, and elections are the day after. It gets me thinking about a conversation I had with Pat before we joined the military. He spoke about the risks with signing the papers. How once we committed, we were at the mercy of the American leadership and the American people. How we could be thrown in a direction not of our volition. How fighting as a soldier would leave us without a voice… until we got out.

Much has happened since we handed over our voice:
Somehow we were sent to invade a nation because it was a direct threat to the American people, or to the world, or harbored terrorists, or was involved in the September 11 attacks, or received weapons-grade uranium from Niger, or had mobile weapons labs, or WMD, or had a need to be liberated, or we needed to establish a democracy, or stop an insurgency, or stop a civil war we created that can’t be called a civil war even though it is. Something like that.

Somehow America has become a country that projects everything that it is not and condemns everything that it is.

Somehow our elected leaders were subverting international law and humanity by setting up secret prisons around the world, secretly kidnapping people, secretly holding them indefinitely, secretly not charging them with anything, secretly torturing them. Somehow that overt policy of torture became the fault of a few “bad apples” in the military.

Somehow back at home, support for the soldiers meant having a five-year-old kindergartener scribble a picture with crayons and send it overseas, or slapping stickers on cars, or lobbying Congress for an extra pad in a helmet. It’s interesting that a soldier on his third or fourth tour should care about a drawing from a five-year-old; or a faded sticker on a car as his friends die around him; or an extra pad in a helmet, as if it will protect him when an IED throws his vehicle 50 feet into the air as his body comes apart and his skin melts to the seat.

Somehow the more soldiers that die, the more legitimate the illegal invasion becomes.

Somehow American leadership, whose only credit is lying to its people and illegally invading a nation, has been allowed to steal the courage, virtue and honor of its soldiers on the ground.

Somehow those afraid to fight an illegal invasion decades ago are allowed to send soldiers to die for an illegal invasion they started.

Somehow faking character, virtue and strength is tolerated.

Somehow profiting from tragedy and horror is tolerated.

Somehow the death of tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of people is tolerated.

Somehow subversion of the Bill of Rights and The Constitution is tolerated.

Somehow suspension of Habeas Corpus is supposed to keep this country safe.

Somehow torture is tolerated.

Somehow lying is tolerated.

Somehow reason is being discarded for faith, dogma, and nonsense.

Somehow American leadership managed to create a more dangerous world.

Somehow a narrative is more important than reality.

Somehow America has become a country that projects everything that it is not and condemns everything that it is.

Somehow the most reasonable, trusted and respected country in the world has become one of the most irrational, belligerent, feared, and distrusted countries in the world.

Somehow being politically informed, diligent, and skeptical has been replaced by apathy through active ignorance.

Somehow the same incompetent, narcissistic, virtueless, vacuous, malicious criminals are still in charge of this country.

Somehow this is tolerated.

Somehow nobody is accountable for this.

In a democracy, the policy of the leaders is the policy of the people. So don’t be shocked when our grandkids bury much of this generation as traitors to the nation, to the world and to humanity. Most likely, they will come to know that “somehow” was nurtured by fear, insecurity and indifference, leaving the country vulnerable to unchecked, unchallenged parasites.

Luckily this country is still a democracy. People still have a voice. People still can take action.

It can start after Pat’s birthday.

Brother and Friend of Pat Tillman,
Kevin Tillman

Original Post

Handful of Races May Tip Control of Congress

I keep saying it… get out and vote this year. If you thought 2004 was a waste of your vote, then this is the year to plan for that future vote count in 2008. Most of the congressional seats are back up for grabs and it comes down to power, money and influence in the presidential races so make sure you vote in the appropriate congressmen this year. Any it gives the American people to clear some trash out of the gov.

Washington Post article

By Dan Balz and Chris Cillizza
Washington Post Staff Writers
Monday, February 6, 2006; A01

In Pennsylvania, Sen. Rick Santorum (R) has been running behind his challenger for months. In Montana, Sen. Conrad Burns (R), linked to the Jack Abramoff scandal, is on the defensive. In Ohio, Sen. Mike DeWine (R) is struggling to overcome a toxic environment of scandals that have tarnished the state Republican Party.

Not since 1994 has the party in power — in this case the Republicans — faced such a discouraging landscape in a midterm election. President Bush is weaker than he was just a year ago, a majority of voters in recent polls have signaled their desire for a change in direction, and Democrats outpoll Republicans on which party voters think is more capable of handling the country’s biggest problems.

The result is a midterm already headed toward what appears to be an inevitable conclusion: Democrats are poised to gain seats in the House and in the Senate for the first time since 2000. The difference between modest gains (a few seats in the Senate and fewer than 10 in the House) and significant gains (half a dozen in the Senate and well more than a dozen in the House) is where the battle for control of Congress will be fought.

The contest begins with Republicans holding 231 House seats and Democrats holding 201, with one Democrat-leaning independent and two vacancies, split between the parties. Democrats need to gain 15 seats to dethrone the GOP majority. In the Senate, Republicans hold 55 seats to the Democrats’ 44, with one Democrat-leaning independent. Democrats need six more seats to take power.

What makes the year ahead compelling is the tension between two powerful factors: the broader political environment plainly favors Democrats, but the on-the-ground realities of many races give Republicans an advantage as they seek to preserve their majorities.

History dictates a certain modesty about predictions. Early in 1994, few foresaw the size of the Republican landslide-in-the-making. By November, the anti-incumbent mood overwhelmed even well-prepared candidates. If the public mood deteriorates further this year, Republicans could be swamped; if not, the GOP could be adequately equipped to wage trench warfare state by state and district by district and leave Washington’s current balance of power intact.

At this point, the biggest challenge facing the Democrats is the narrow size of the battlefield. To win control of the House or Senate, Democrats must either capture the overwhelming percentage of genuinely competitive contests or find a way to put more races “in play” than is the case now.

Redistricting after the 2000 census left most House districts safely in the hands of one party or another. In 2004, just 32 districts were won with less than 55 percent of the vote — giving incumbents a grip on power, said Rhodes Cook, an independent analyst.

Jim Jordan, a Democratic strategist and former executive director of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, said the odds strongly favor gains by the Democrats but not necessarily Democratic takeovers. “From almost every standpoint — the national political environment, the state political environments, recruiting, retention, fundraising — Democratic candidates are in exceedingly strong shape,” he said. “Because of the map, a flip in either chamber is significantly harder, but you can certainly see how it’s done.”

Republicans and Democrats have adopted contrasting strategies in the race for the House. Democrats hope to nationalize the elections around the issues of corruption and dissatisfaction with Bush. Republicans want their candidates to run strictly local races. “Incumbents don’t get beat because there’s a bad national environment,” said Carl Forti, communications director for the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC).

But Joe Gaylord, top political lieutenant to Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) during the 1994 takeover, said Republicans should not underestimate the impact of national tides. “If you have mechanics without message, you have no motivation,” he said. “The danger is in a bad year, as the Democrats would remember from 1994, is that you have supporters who stay home.”

Party operatives devoted much of 2005 to fundraising and candidate recruitment, with the political climate helping Democrats in both areas. Democratic strategists said Bush’s weakness helped attract a number of top-tier candidates, while Democratic campaign committees, particularly the DSCC, outperformed expectations on the fundraising front.

The DSCC ended last year with about $15 million more in the bank than the NRSC. On the House side, the NRCC raised $22 million more than its Democratic counterpart, but ended the year with just $4 million more in its campaign coffers. Looming over all of these financial calculations is the sizable $28.5 million cash edge the Republican National Committee has over the Democratic National Committee, which could wipe out other Democratic fundraising successes in 2005.

If there is a wave that carries Democrats to power in the Senate, it must begin in Democratic strongholds of the East, Pennsylvania and Rhode Island, before sweeping west through such traditionally GOP-leaning states as Montana, Ohio, Missouri and Arizona. Democrats are most optimistic about defeating Republican incumbents in the first four of these half-dozen states. Beating the incumbents in the other two looks more difficult.

Republicans hope to insulate themselves from expected losses by targeting two of the Democrats’ three open Senate seats — Maryland and Minnesota — and are talking up their chances against three Democratic incumbents: Sens. Robert C. Byrd (W.Va.), Robert Menendez (N.J.) and Ben Nelson (Neb.).

The marquee Senate contest this year is in Pennsylvania, where Santorum is being challenged in his bid for a third term by state Treasurer Bob Casey Jr. (D). Santorum’s high-profile conservatism combined with Bush’s flagging numbers in the Democratic-leaning state have given Casey a clear edge in polls the past six months. But Casey has yet to define himself as a Senate candidate, preferring to stay away from hot-button issues and focus on Santorum.

In Rhode Island, Sen. Lincoln D. Chafee (R) faces a two-front battle. He will face off against Cranston Mayor Steve Laffey, who is running as a populist outsider, in the Sept. 12 GOP primary. Should he advance to the general election, Chafee will face one of two Democrats: former state attorney general Sheldon Whitehouse, the current front-runner for his party’s nomination, or Secretary of State Matt Brown.

Republican strategists are more concerned about Chafee’s ability to win the primary than the general election. One of the most moderate Republicans in the Senate, Chafee must win over a significant portion of his party’s conservative base to defeat Laffey in a primary that is open only to registered Republicans and independents. Most strategists say any Republican but Chafee would be hard-pressed to win the general election in a heavily Democratic state.

Two other Republican senators appear to be in real trouble at the moment, as two different scandals echo through the election year.

In Montana, Burns has been hurt by reports detailing his financial and staff ties to disgraced lobbyist Abramoff. Democrats have already run three ads hitting Burns on the scandal. Burns has responded with a commercial insisting that Abramoff never influenced him. Republicans say that Burns is ramping up his campaign now and dismiss chatter about his potential retirement.

Nevertheless, the scandal publicity has dampened Burns’s reelection prospects. He holds narrow leads over state Auditor John Morrison and state Sen. Jon Tester, the two Democrats seeking to unseat him in November.

DeWine, on the other hand, is struggling in his reelection race because of GOP scandals in the Buckeye State, which have scuffed the Republican brand in Ohio even though DeWine is not personally implicated. Outgoing Gov. Bob Taft (R) was convicted of a misdemeanor offense last year for his role in the scandals, and his approval ratings are now below 20 percent.

Not all is gloomy for DeWine, however, as Democrats seem headed toward a nasty May primary that could leave the opposition drained. That contest pits Rep. Sherrod Brown against Iraq war veteran Paul Hackett, who excited liberal bloggers last year with a narrower-than-expected loss in a congressional special election.

Even if Democrats defeated those four vulnerable Republicans, they would have to beat two somewhat less vulnerable Republicans, Arizona Sen. Jon Kyl and Missouri Sen. James M. Talent, to pick up the six seats needed for control. Or they would have to beat one of the two and count on Rep. Harold E. Ford Jr. (D) winning the Tennessee open seat vacated by retiring Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist.

At this point estimates of the number of genuinely competitive House races ranges from a low of 25 or 30 to as high as 40 in the most optimistic Democratic scenarios. Democrats’ best opportunities will come in Republican-held open seats, with the three best prospects, according to both parties, in Arizona’s 8th District, Colorado’s 7th District and Iowa’s 1st District.

But Republicans say they have opportunities to pick up seats in Ohio’s 6th and 13th districts, both of which are being vacated by Democratic members seeking statewide office.

Given recent trends, in which reelection rates have hovered around 95 percent in the House, it is no easy task to beat a sitting member of Congress. Because of the Abramoff scandal, however, Democrats have two golden opportunities to oust embattled incumbents in Ohio and Texas.

Former House majority leader Tom DeLay (R-Tex.), who, in addition to his connections to Abramoff, is under indictment by an Austin grand jury, finds himself in what promises to be a close race against former representative Nick Lampson (D). Former Republican representative Steve Stockman’s independent candidacy is another complicating factor for DeLay.

Ohio Rep. Robert W. Ney (R) appears to be at the center of the pay-to-play schemes of Abramoff and has been informed by federal investigators that he may be indicted. Ney has pledged to run regardless but is trailing his two little-known Democratic opponents in internal GOP surveys.

Indiana is another place to watch as GOP Reps. Michael E. Sodrel and John N. Hostettler both face extremely competitive Democratic challenges in districts that favor Republicans on the presidential level. Sodrel faces a rematch against Baron Hill (D), the incumbent he narrowly ousted in 2004. Hostettler — who makes little effort to raise money and forswears political consultants in favor of a local network of conservative activists — is being challenged by Vanderburgh County Sheriff Brad Ellsworth (D).

Among Democratic incumbents, Republican House strategists see Reps. John Barrow (Ga.), Melissa L. Bean (Ill.), Leonard L. Boswell (Iowa), Chet Edwards (Tex.) and Jim Marshall (Ga.) as beatable.