T-P:Former U.S. Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich, who was one of the first national figures to call to congratulate U.S. Rep. Anh "Joseph" Cao, R- New Orleans, after his improbable victory over Democratic incumbent William Jefferson in December, appeared Monday at a New Orleans cocktail party and fundraiser for the 2nd District congressman.
Gross.
Cao, after speaking to students at Southern University at New Orleans on Monday morning, said that while he knew he was going to be seeing Gingrich later in the day, he did not realize it was a fundraiser.
"It is for him or for me?" Cao asked.
Witty!
Cao said he had only talked to Gingrich the one time...
Good. I don't know how long Representative Cao's
"Good time Charlie" "Naive Wonderboy" political personae will serve him, but I'm actually still enjoying it. Many of my progressive nolablogger friends assume that the GOP is using Cao-- pulling his strings, and brainwashing him into a conservative true-believer. I could be wrong, but I don't think so. Whether Cao is "naively brilliiant" or "brilliantly naive", I'm fascinated by the way he (instinctively?) responds to questions. He is often creative and funny. He takes risks that few others in his party would attempt (i.e., joking about being a closet Democrat). Granted, Cao gets a "pass" from the GOP because of his district. Also, the
Times Picayune positively
adores the chap, so he has more freedom than your run-of-the-mill freshman Gooper. But still, I honestly think this guy is quite skillful. Deceptively so. The problem is, Cao's future in local politics is probably limited, but (should he lose re-election) the national GOP will open all kinds of doors for him as a talking head, spokesman... etc.. But if he pursues such a yucky professional path, then Cao will have to sharply curtail some of his more-progressive views as well as his sense of humor. He won't have the freedom to be himself when microphones are in his face, or he'll get hammered if he makes a mistake. When the time comes, I'm interested to see which path he will take.
T-P:Former Congresswoman Lindy Boggs turned 93 on Friday. On Tuesday, members of the Louisiana congressional delegation, past and present, gathered in Sen. Mary Landrieu's basement hideaway in the Capitol to share a few laughs and offer congratulations.
"We haven't laughed this much together in a long time; this is really good," said Landrieu, the dean of the delegation.
It also was the first opportunity for Boggs to meet her latest successor representing the 2nd Congressional District, Anh "Joseph" Cao.
Sounds festive.
The gathering included all the members of the Louisiana Senate and House delegation, with the exception of Charles Boustany, whose father died Monday. Also present were some heavyweights from the past: former Democratic Sens. J. Bennett Johnston and John Breaux (though Breaux arrived too late for the group photo), and former Reps. Jim McCrery, R- Shreveport; Jimmy Hayes, R-Lafayette; and Billy Tauzin, R-Chackbay.
(That reminds me: when he's giving face to the national media and stumping for
out of state campaign bucks, why does Gov. Jindal insist on using Tauzin's
pre-Katrina quip that "half of Louisiana is under water, and half is under indictment"? On balance, it's unhelpful. Jindal must have said it again during his
60 Minutes interview, because they shoehorned it into their introductory piece which also featured the bizarre statement that Jindal is "trying to put the 'big un-easy' back on dry land". ) Anyway, back to Cao:
The presence of such formidable alumni was a reminder of the current delegation's relative lack of clout, a paucity of seniority that even Landrieu's inadvertent introduction of Cao to Boggs as "Chairman Cao" couldn't remedy.
Did Lindy Boggs get that "inadvertent" one-liner by reading
YRHT? (As I previously noted, Dillyberto deserves the credit.)
Here's the deal. I'm assuming Cao isn't partisan. He (wisely) ran as a Repubican against Jefferson because he couldn't win as a Dem (too crowded) or as an Independent (no money). Despite many of his views and votes, I like the guy. I think he has political talent but no clear-cut political future. It will be interesting to see what he decides to do in 2 years. I'm happy to have supported him, and very glad he beat Dollar Bill. I'm terribly intrigued by Cao's "naive brilliance" (shtick?). However, I could be wrong be wrong about him. If, for example, Cao has a sustained working relationship with Greg Meffert, and/or he decides to become a GOP talking head hack, I'll have to retract most of my plaudits for Cao. Them's the breaks, I guess; especially when you often publicly support and endorse candidates who adopt "reality-based" campaign strategies, and therefore give themselves and their supporters a chance in hell of winning.
Warning, rant below:
I get some flack about Cao from my nolablogger friends-- friends who often vote for third-party candidates. Now, I don't have a problem with third party candidates-- I would actually love to see more Libs, Greens and Independents in office. But, to get there, third party candidates need to be 1) talented and 2) have a campaign strategy TO WIN. Like I said in this
YRHT crucifixion of Nader, "It's easy to be ideologically pure when you have no intention of getting more than 2% of the vote." And if you really think that there's not a dime's worth of difference between any Demopublican and any Republicrat-- fine! Vote for your 2 percenters. But for those of us who can discern small but important differences between candidates and between major parties, and who think these small but important differences are worth fighting for, and who think voting for a third party candidate who doesn't care about winning is at best wasteful and at worst a spoiler vote against our preferred establishment candidate... please understand that we have not necessarilly been co-opted by the Dem/GOP machine. We understand that, too often, we are voting on the basis of small differences. These decisions often result in us having to take lumps from the third-party purists whenever "our" candidate compromises or sells out... etc. Conversely, third-party purists never have to take their lumps after the results are tabulated (unless their candidate was a "spoiler") because their pols always lose.
Here are two local examples (I'm not gonna call out the nolabloggers who supported these guys-- y'all can pipe up in the comments if you want. And, admittedly, the "establishment" candidates in these races were far from ideal, but they did have a plan to win):
Malik Rahim, ran for the 2nd Congressional District seat.
Green Party stalwarts endorsed him. One quick question: how did
convicted armed robber Malik Rahim plan to win? What was his winning political strategy to beat the "corrupt Jefferson machine? Riddle me that. (And no b.s. about him at least being a "spoiler" for Jefferson unless you take into account the Libertarian votes.)
Malcolm Suber ran for City Council in 2007. He was endorsed by
the Nation. Today, T-P columnist James Gill
summarized Suber's
long-held belief that... well, just read:
Most of what they are saying about Stacy Head is scurrilous or irrational, but she cannot look you in the face and deny the fundamental charge against her.
Head, as alleged, is white. And that is unacceptable, according to Malcolm Suber, who is leading a campaign to recall her. This is "a majority black district, and we think it should have black representation," he said.
Suber went on to call Head a racist. While you couldn't quite cite that as an example of the pot calling the kettle black, Suber's sense of irony is clearly a little defective.
Those who supported Suber don't have to explain this dreck, because he didn't win. He didn't even come close to winning, so those Suber votes are long forgotten. But many of those same nolabloggers who supported Suber don't subscribe to his views on race. Many of these same nolabloggers in fact supported Obama (or at least were pleased that he was elected over McCain) in this "majority white" district called the United States of America. But will they have to endure punishment every time their candidate (Suber) says something offensive? No.
You don't have to assess candidates through a political plausibility prism, like I do. Vote for whomever you want. But I think it wouldn't hurt some of my more sophisticated nolablogger friends who often support 3rd party candidates to include plausibility in their decision-making process once in a while. If a candidate is not willing to work hard to find ways to earn as many votes as he or she can, what does that say about the candidate? Suggestions: If you're not in the news, make some. If you can't raise a lot of money, then raise a lot of volunteers. Seize every opportunity to confront and knock the establishment candidates off-balance. Leverage creativity and humor, find and own the hidden issue or scandal... Channel your convictions into statements about issues and policies that will resonate with voters' emotions. Above all: Listen! Work your tail off, and maybe,
maybe, you might generate a timely wave that will shock the experts.
My basic point is this: forget the Republicrat stranglehold on politics; until 3rd parties nominate talented
candidates* with winning strategies, their own worst enemies are themselves. Sure, even if you get a talented candidate with a winning strategy, it will take more work and creativity and timing to be successful than it would a major-party candidate. The odds are still against you. But, in times and areas with widespread pain and discontent, the opportunities to "surprise" are there. Politics can be more fluid and surprising than people suspect, especially if you leverage innovation and creativity, and outwork and out-think your opponents. You can come to my door as an incredible third party longshot, but if you show me talent and a realistic plan to win-- which probably entails both incredible political risk
and difficult political compromises**-- I'm all ears. In fact, I'd be quite excited to meet such a candidate. Few things stimulate my political senses like potential election-day surprises and upsets.
---
* When I say "candidates", I mean
candidates. I'm talking indefatigable campaigning machines-- not egomaniacs who like soapboxes, or people who have "done good work" but go through the political motions and expect a miracle on election day.
** Yes purists, getting 51% of the vote entails compromise.
---
Update: Props to Tim for writing a mea culpa about his support of Suber. Again, Suber is just a local example who was in the news recently. The rant is not about Suber or Tim, specifically, it's just an expression of frustration about how there's often little after-the-fact accountability on the part of our green/indy/3rd party friends, once the elections are over and we're "stuck" with the lesser evil.
Labels: Cao, Elections and Campaigns
20 Comments:
Although I tend to be similarly critical of "Republicrat" establishment politics, I don't recognize myself in any of your non-call-out call-outs there so I take it this isn't specifically about me.... which is a shame because if it HAD been about me I would have insisted on being linked to and slammed more explicitly.
Anyway the actual point I want to make here is that many commentators level criticism of "compromise" candidates just because they find them distasteful and not because they're actually interested in political organizing.
In other words, sometimes Mary Landrieu sucking is just Mary Landrieu sucking and I don't see the harm in saying so.
No, you're not among the nameless throng I had foremost in mind.
There's no harm in saying Mary sucks, but what Suber said "sucks" too, but everyone who was militating for Suber a year and a half ago will never have to answer for it. (Not that that would be a particularly useful exercise, but it's just a gripe I had when thinking about my support of Cao.)
Suber also didn't have a clue how he would design and run a campaign to get votes. That's the name of the game, and he got under 2%. What's worse, I'm not sure he knew what to do even if he did (somehow) get into the runoff.
This is a great post! I think you really hit the nail on the head...I learned a lot from the first presidential election I had the privilege of voting in (2000) and I am far more pragmatic now--not out of cowardice or pessimism, but because I have come to believe that that compromise is the only path to something resembling the political leadership I'd like to see someday (as opposed to impotent fantasies of such political manna, falling suddenly from the sky).
Great Rant!
It's okay to be a 2%er. It's even better to be a Three Percenter.
But yeah, you're right about elections.
I'll 'fess up, I pushed (not hard) for both Suber and Rahim. Not because I thought they could win, but mostly as a protest vote because I thought the other choices were crappy.
never thought either would win
never really wanted either to win.
Suber turned out to be a huge phony.
me likey
now take a deep breath and let it out slowly we dont want you to have a stroke
Funny, I accidentally flipped on Kaare Johnson yesterday and he was eviscerating Suber on the Recall effort, and his "she's a racist and white supremacist" comments. Suber had nothing to counter his half-wit statements...just sad.
Oyster: I absolutely agree with your rant. In fact, I said pretty much the same thing.
Though, I did support Malik Rahim for Congress. I liked the fact that a convicted armed robber would learn from his crimes and use his life experience to try and help others. I also could not bring myself to vote for William Jefferson (for obvious reasons) or Cao (because of his gleeful acceptance of the Family Research Council endorsement which either proves he endorses their beliefs or he was willing to remain ignorant of their beliefs to get votes). And because I could not bring myself vote for those two, and I did not want to sit out and not vote, I had to choose. Of course I was not delusional enough to believe that Rahim would win.
Jeffrey: The Landrieu argument tends to be a different discussion than voting for 3rd party candidates. Most people who are more liberal and who are in the "Landrieu Sucks" crowd tend to want other Democrats to run for the same spot who will be more loyal to the ideals of the Democratic party (because they see her as being disloyal). Unfortunately, those people also don't understand the political realities that as we currently are, Louisiana will not vote for a Democrat who is more liberal than Mary Landrieu. So supporting one would be cutting off our noses to spite our faces, since the end result would be another Republican Senator.
Good rant, from my pov.
I don't want to get on anybody in particular's ding dong about casting a protest vote. Doing a protest vote is understandable, and I've probably cast a few myself. But really, a protest vote is a bad idea, in the end; it's the electoral analog to most terrorist attacks: a very public admission that you are utterly powerless and desperate. Basically, a protest vote is not only weak, not only an admission of weakness, but an affirmation of it.
A protest vote sometimes changes an election in a fortunate way (Clinton/Perot/Bush) but often goes the other way (Bush, The Eternal Recurrence/Gore/Nader). When you're casting a protest vote, you are more likely not to care what it does to the election, because you have opted out (which is what a protest vote means). It's almost better to not vote, I'd say. Or, get good candidates who, while they may not win, would be perfectly good in office if they *did* win.
Louisiana will not vote for a Democrat who is more liberal than Mary Landrieu.
I think this, while certainly factual in a sense, also might show a failure of imagination. I am not from LA and don't know it well, but I do know the South - Deep and otherwise - better than your average yankee, and know full well that a Southern pol can be 'more liberal' than Landrieu about some things and be quite popular. She has the Evan Bayh syndrome: the problem is not so much true conservatism, as it is a combination of profound mediocrity and sheer cowardice. Politics is not a zero sum game, and playing defense-only suggests that it is, and is a weak position, inherently.
Feel free to take me to school about LA politics, which I again, totally admit to not knowing that much about (except for the Longs). This is just my interpretation of what Oyster is saying here about creativity, etc. I may be off-base about LA, but I think the point that politics is not a zero sum game - especially now, when ideological labels are so much closer to meaningless than in the past - is valid in this context.
Mary Landrieu and Evan Bayh warm the hearts of the GOP. It's the next best thing to having a Republican in that seat, maybe even better in some contexts (like now). Eternally terrified pols like these two are *very* easy to manipulate - just push the button;just lift your finger in the general direction of the button, and they both start to quiver. It's a fucking reflex!
jonny: When I said that we would not be able to elect a more liberal Democrat to the Senate, I said that we could not do so with the political realities as they currently are.
If we work to change the hearts and minds of the voters of Louisiana, if we convince them to stop voting against their best interests and that progressive candidates are the more likely candidates to stand up for the working man, then perhaps things will change.
Now, on to the whole "protest vote", thats not really what I did when I voted 3rd party in the last LA02 Congressional election. If I had no candidates that I could support, I would not have voted.
And my voting for Rahim did not help Cao or Jefferson. I wasn't voting for either of them anyway. So had I just stayed home and not voted, they would have had the same vote totals.
You're right. I'm posting a mea culpa tonight.
Peace,
Tim
Hi DanielZ,
You're points are well taken. I must admit that I was kind using your comment as a point of departure for mine. But I'd also hasten to add that if you let your opponent define you ('liberal') you can never win on their terms...
OK, now I know what this reminds me of. This is like "The View" where everybody rants and crap and no one really cares, except for those who rant.
But I rant and I don't care. Now I am confused.
Maybe I'm bi.
This is like "The View" where everybody rants and crap and no one really cares, except for those who rant.
HA. No, not really. I can imagine a more liberal - depending on how you define 'liberal' - Senator being elected in LA right now, but it's not going to happen, of course. Anyway, the Evan Bayh/Mary Landrieu syndrome is what The Bard called "Everyone being up to their chins in shit and pleading 'Don't make a wave!'." It's not an *inevitable* situation. It's a choice, or series of choices.
If nobody gave a shit, D-BB, I don't think that they'd have taken the time to read this post and the references within. Sometimes bitching about something IS doing something. It doesn't cover the whole problem, but it can get some good shit STARTED.
It's just when it stays a circle-jerk, that you've got a problem with motivation and willingness to get up and do something.
Can't comment on Cao definitively, as I've been out of New Orleans for far, far too long, and have not kept up with the politics as I should have. BUT, never take ANYBODY political as "naive." I remember when Scary Mary was considered "wet behind the ears," at the same time that redneck republicunts-in-all-but-name were spreading those decades-old rumors about her blowing half of the Louisiana Legislature. That girl was born a politician. And I don't mean that as a compliment. Her daddy was one helluva mayor, from what I've learned, but she doesn't seem to follow his ideals THAT much.
Whether Cao will become a power-monger or not, I've no idea yet. Is he the perfect poster-boy for "the big tent"? Hell yes. After Piyush's turd-in-the-punchbowl moment, they're THRILLED about Cao, I have no doubt. Will he allow them to use him like that? That has yet to be seen. But any politician who's still actually "naive" is one who hasn't run yet, or who still thinks that Nader was "right."
As far as protest votes go, I still feel guilty for my one and only protest vote, for Al "Superman" Jones. Yes, they'd already wrapped-up the election and gifted it to See-Ray, but I should've voted for an actual CANDIDATE. And we can all thank Jim Bernhard for a "democratic party" that would claim Nagin in the first fucking place. MeeMaw's not exempt, by any means, but she was in over her head from day one, as we all damned well knew. None of us imagined that they'd set her up via a federal genocide, but then, with Rove in the equation, we should've expected the worst.
Point being: I no longer believe in "protest votes," when so many lives hang in the fucking balance. Never voted for Nader or ol' big-ears whatsisname, Perot, either, but Al Jones...? That was just stupid. I'd have been better off voting for Al Scramuzza.
Hey, would have responded earlier but usually no one with any brains ever responds to what I say. OK, don't take that wrong, that didn't come out right….but aww, nevermind. Anyways….
Look, if John Adams was alive today and saw what we are doing to ourselves with this so call "democracy" he would shit. For all those guys back then who risked their lives and all they sacrificed and look what we got. 2 morons from 2 parties running for president with the same 2 moronic parties controlling this country. Say the word "militia" and you are shot by their military who works for 1 of the 2 lesser of evils belonging to those 2 parties.
Don't say "Green". Don't say "Nadar". We all know that they are shut out of the process by the 2 parties whom by the way, are pretty much alike when you get down to it. It's a trick.
You can make every case you want for those ass swipe republicans but I assure you, an identical case can be made against the caring ass wipe democratic party.
Your representation by either party is nonexistent unless you are a lobbyist or a major campaign contributor. Both parties are populated by whores; expensive ones.
You see, this is why I hate bloggers.....
1. They are self-indulgent.
2. They could be doing something useful instead of posting BS propaganda all day.
3. They will not send me nude pictures of themselves...well, I guess Jeffro over at da libary thought I was bi or gay or something.
Anway, you know what I just realized? I don't give a crap.
Please note:
I refrained from using the following words in this comment:
"fuck" "motherfucker",
"cock" "sucker" "asshole", "cunt" "fireplace".
I'm am definitely making progress. I can’t wait to show this to my therapist.
Not cussing is not an accomplishment. To me, not cussing is bowing down before the dominant paradigm that the ENTIRE WORLD must be "baby-safe," and that words have "moral value."
Only within the confines of cult playbooks can WORDS be "good" or "bad." Those who attempt to control language are truly attempting to control THOUGHT. While there are words that even I will not use, except in a pejorative sense (if you lived surrounded by purposefully-illiterate redneck republicunts, you'd avoid sounding LIKE THEM, too. "Fuck" is a "bad word," but "n****r" is PROPER GRAMMAR to them.), NO ONE will EVER fucking tell me WHICH WORDS I "CAN" or "CAN NOT" use.
Yeah, teh Homeland Security SS-wannabe piglets will TRY to censor language, citing the presence of bibul-bangers, left-behinds, or what-the-fuck-ever, but my Constitution and its Bill of Rights still stands, I don't care how many volts the bitches wanna taser ME with. The only reason I didn't make that Vitty-Cent "townhall" campaign stump is because I didn't want my 63-year-old, 2-stroke-survivor neighbor to get the voltage.
As I believe that Erster has more than adequately stated, if you do not see ANY difference between the two parties (and I'm not talking about the money-grubbing douchebags like Howard Dean, or the new face of "The Big Tent," Michael Steel) then you're not trying. If you can't find a single difference amongst even in the newest, greenest grassroots kids running, then I don't know what to tellya. Sounds like you've given up on this country entirely. And as I just said, protest votes mean nothing but big regrets later.
I look for the differences. Once upon a time, Henson Moore was a republican whom I could respect. Nowadays, he's just another lobbyist whore, as go they all. Since then, especially since The Shaw Group took over the tattered remnants of the Louisiana Democratic Party (which refuses to even so much as issue SIGNS to anybody north of I-10, much LESS north of Baker!), you gotta look at ALL of the motherfuckers closely.
The minute I hear "family values" or "securing the homeland," much less "tax cuts as incentives for corporations to RE-INVEST," I know exACTLY what I'm looking at: another spit-and-polished silver-spoon republicunt, looking to inherit the way that Dumbya did. No matter whether there's a "D" or an "R" behind the name. Fuck, I even VOTED for Mary Landrieu, until the bitch responded to my signing an ACLU petition to PROTECT WOMENS' RIGHT TO BIRTH CONTROL, AND ACCESS TO HEALTHCARE --- I shit y'all not --- with a form letter telling me how much she "AGREES WITH MY PRO-LIFE BELIEFS AND DEEPLY-HELD RELIGIOUS VALUES." Yeah, her interns couldn't even be bothered to READ THE FUCKING LETTER I WROTE AFTER I SIGNED THE PETITION.
And guess how Holy Mary voted on THAT one. She's about as much a feminist as Piyush is. And they get their orders from the same exact place.
All I can tellya, D-BB, is caveat emptor. Do your research. Most of all, If you don't vote, YOU CAN'T BITCH.
And, um, I've looked at your blog, punkin', and it sounds like you're either being so snarky about other bloggers that it's looped around to backwash, or maybe you're only halfway done with your soul-searching. So if you hate bloggers, why do you continue to post?
I *know* it ain't 'cause you actually believe that you're gonna get no dial-a-porn pictures... Even a Hooters girl would be able to read between YOUR lines.*
*(Normally, I don't pick on anybody willing to bust their ass, or their feet in those horrible hooker heels, to earn an honest living, but if y'all had known my former Avon Lady, a gal named 'Stormy' --- BY HER PARENTS --- you'd know why I have a current grudge against the girls in orange.)
OK, so after reading your comment, help me out here. You saying
you like me or hate me? Surely you are not indifferent.
As for me hating bloggers and being a blogger, I don't see a contradiction.
I also noted that you censored the word "nigger" while letting the word "fuck" fly.
You are such a sil*y nil*y. Also, thanks for the pic.
中国公文网 中国皮肤网 中国呼吸网 肿瘤网 癌症康复网 工作总结 个人工作总结 半年工作总结 年终工作总结 单位工作总结 教师工作总结 教学工作总结 学校工作总结 德育工作总结 财务工作总结 医务工作总结 安全工作总结 乡镇工作总结 党员工作总结 团委工作总结 公司工作总结 实习工作总结 班主任工作总结 党支部工作总结 办公室工作总结 学生会工作总结 工作报告 政府报告 述职报告 述职述廉 考察报告 自查报告 情况报告 调研报告 调查报告 申请报告 辞职报告 实习报告 验收报告 评估报告 工作汇报 思想汇报 汇报材料 情况通报 情况汇报 心得体会 学习体会 工作体会 培训体会 读后感 领导讲话 庆典致辞 节日致辞 开业开幕 演讲稿 竞聘演讲 就职演讲 比赛演讲 征文演讲 节日演讲 演讲技巧 工作意见 活动策划 工作方案 整改方案 实施方案 企划文案 营销方案 培训方案 应急预案 规章制度 法律法规 事迹材料 先进事迹 个人事迹 申报材料 学习材料 考察材料 经验材料 交流材料 自我鉴定 工作计划 工作规划 年度工作计划 学校工作计划 个人工作计划 团委工作计划 工会工作计划 单位工作计划 党支部工作计划 民主生活会 入党志愿书 入党申请书 入团申请书 转正申请书 党性分析材料 先教活动 整改措施 剖析材料 公告通知 模板范例 贺电贺词 常用书信 合同范本 社交礼仪 法律文书 论文
