Elections Coming Up volume #1
Jane Harman (Wiki) vs. Marcy Winograd
The battle for California's 36th District is worth paying attention to this year. Instead of the usual Republican sacrifice candidate being thrown at incumbent Jane Harman, a democratice challenger is trying to take her place in the general election.
In one corner we have incumbent Blue Dog Democrat (Wiki) Jane Harman, the highest ranking Democrat on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, where she's been spending much of her time in the "post-September 11 world" arguing for stronger security at America's ports. When she's not out stumping on security related issues, she's been busy collecting the endorsements of nearly every Democratic personage within 20 miles of the South Bay.
In the other corner, we have challenger Marcy Winograd, who's running as a progressive against the conservative Harman. Her platform is chock full of radical positions (radical in America's political environment, at least), including the elimination of the death penalty, calling for Articles of Impeachment against both Bush and Cheney and an immediate withdrawal of troops from Iraq. She's managed to attract the endorsements of a variety of local grass roots organisations and individuals, several local Democratic clubs and a broad assortment of national leftist organsiations and activists.
Personally, I'm glad to see the conservative Harman challenged, but given the wide breadth and radical nature of Winograd's platform, I'd have serious doubts as to her ability to be effective if actually elected. What are your impressions of this race?
The battle for California's 36th District is worth paying attention to this year. Instead of the usual Republican sacrifice candidate being thrown at incumbent Jane Harman, a democratice challenger is trying to take her place in the general election.
In one corner we have incumbent Blue Dog Democrat (Wiki) Jane Harman, the highest ranking Democrat on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, where she's been spending much of her time in the "post-September 11 world" arguing for stronger security at America's ports. When she's not out stumping on security related issues, she's been busy collecting the endorsements of nearly every Democratic personage within 20 miles of the South Bay.
In the other corner, we have challenger Marcy Winograd, who's running as a progressive against the conservative Harman. Her platform is chock full of radical positions (radical in America's political environment, at least), including the elimination of the death penalty, calling for Articles of Impeachment against both Bush and Cheney and an immediate withdrawal of troops from Iraq. She's managed to attract the endorsements of a variety of local grass roots organisations and individuals, several local Democratic clubs and a broad assortment of national leftist organsiations and activists.
Personally, I'm glad to see the conservative Harman challenged, but given the wide breadth and radical nature of Winograd's platform, I'd have serious doubts as to her ability to be effective if actually elected. What are your impressions of this race?
19 Comments:
It's a sad-assed state of affairs when people assert with a straight face that a candidate's "radical nature" might make her ineffective.
You've probably been voting for cautious, "electable," non-boat-rocking Democrats in national elections for the last six years or so. How's that been working out for you, on the effectiveness front?
I think the vast majority of the voters in CA-36 are against this Iraq war, and want our troops returned home now. I think the vast majority of the voters in CA-36 are against the president's Patriot Act, and want our civil liberties restored now. I also think a solid plurality of CA-36 would favor impeachment of George W. Bush, would favor Universal Health Care, would favor a new federal budget that re-prioritizes things like education over a bloated, cold-war-era military budget that's as large as every other nation in the world's COMBINED.
It's not radical, it's just progressive. It just *looks* radical next to Blue Dog Jane.
Needless to say, I'm excited about Marcy.
Patrick Meighan
Venice, CA
It's simply the state of affairs in a democracy without the kind of multi-party legislatures that benefit from the dialogue generated by a broader political spectrum. Although I find most of Winograd's platform to be to my liking, I have trouble imagining a rookie congressperson with an agenda that radical (it doesn't seem particularily radical to me, but it's certainly radical compared to the actions and positions of her 400+ potential peers in congress) being effective in carrying it out. You certainly can't disagree with my assertion that the current political structure in Congress is obscenely weighted towards "politics as usual" to the benefit of both dominant parties, creating an environment in which the legislative potential of any new members of that body to "rock the boat" is negligeable.
I'm not a Democrat, nor have I voted for many in recent elections. I've cast my votes for a wide variety of candidates, from several parties, since I started voting in '96. I'm not able to vote for her in the primary, but if Winograd makes it to the general, I'll certainly be voting for her there.
When you say that a radical rookie is ineffective, you're implying that the current bunch of Democrats ARE effective. They aren't, they're useless, they won't filibuster and they won't even vote no on the GOP's creepy nominees or fascistic bills (PATRIOT Act) to let history reflect that there was principled opposition.
So how a rookie's alleged ineffectiveness is any worse than the ineffectiveness of the experienced members is something I just don't understand. Also, there are a few principled Democrats in Congress like Conyers, Waters, Waxman etc., so Winograd and people like her wouldn't be alone like you imply they would.
It's not radical, it's just progressive. It just *looks* radical next to Blue Dog Jane.
And next to 90% of the rest of the current Congress. There's nothing wrong with being radical. This country needs radical solutions to its problems. The Republicans aren't afraid of being radical, revolutionary or otherwise passionate about their beliefs, and the Democrats shouldn't be either.
Anon has a good point. The current crop of Democrats have largely been robbed of effectiveness as they cower before the Republican campaign & media machines. The biggest issue I have with the Democratic Party is it's wholesale inability to carry an issue to its conclusion. Part of this is the wide range of issues that Democratic candidates choose to address in their platforms. Look at the Republicans - they've narrowed their vision to "we hate fags, Christianity is the one true religion, there's no problem that can't be solved at the end of a gun barrel, taxes are universally bad" and it's worked for them. I don't see why the Democrats can't get their shit together into a platform that their constituents are practically begging for "No retarded military adventures, the Constitution and the Bible are seperate documents, it's the economy stupid, people should have health care." We know that there are more issues than that, but the Democrats don't need to campaign on every nameable issue.
In the case of Winograd, on of the things that decreases her attractiveness as a candidate (to me) is the sheer scope of her platform. You don't need to mention that you support the "Antifreeze Bittering Act." We don't want her to go to congress to embitter antifreeze, we want her to impeach the goddamn president. The antifreeze can wait - you've got bigger fish to fry.
Before ya'all dogpile onto me about questioning the potential effectiveness of individual candidates in the face of the life-de-affirming power of Congress - I simply threw that out there as a question. I didn't say "a vote for Winograd is a wasted vote since she'll never amount to anything if she's elected." It's simply an issue that has to be factored in when one casts their vote.
Did you just call Maxine Waters principled? She may be on the right side of a lot of issues, but I certainly wouldn't call her principled.
the true radicals are the architects of this invasion: perle, wolfowitz, feith, ken "cakewalk" adelman, cheney
they are the radicals... instead of making policy those fools should be selling popcorn in a theater somewhere.
damn them all to hell.
"In the case of Winograd, on of the things that decreases her attractiveness as a candidate (to me) is the sheer scope of her platform. You don't need to mention that you support the "Antifreeze Bittering Act." We don't want her to go to congress to embitter antifreeze, we want her to impeach the goddamn president. The antifreeze can wait - you've got bigger fish to fry."
That's interesting to me, your complaint that Marcy's platform is too broad. If there's any one complaint I've heard again and again about Marcy, it's that her platform is too *narrow*: "Out of Iraq. Period." Just now is the first time I've heard the opposite complaint about Marcy and her platform.
In any event, you should know that Marcy Winograd has, in fact, pledged to sponsor the motion to impeach the president. I'm sure she'd prioritize this effort much higher than pet-protection measures like antifreeze bittering. By contrast, we all know that Blue Dog Jane wouldn't come within a hundred feet of an impeachment bill. For that reason alone, Marcy Winograd deserves our time, effort and donations between now and Election day (next Tuesday!)... even (especially!) some effort and donations from we CA-36 constituents who are unable to actually vote in this Democrats-only primary.
Patrick Meighan
Venice, CA
p.s.: I should mention that "Decline to State" voters may vote in the Democratic primary as well.
harman's vote to authorize the use of force in Iraq is alone enough for her to be ousted from Congress. But she does have sensible positions on the defense budget (needs to be cut), wiretapping (should be used to seek out al qaeda, as long as it is under FISA), and port security...
Winograd's position on an immediate pullout is naive. We just blew up a country! We destroyed its internal security system! She does not support Murtha's position, which is the most sensible. Redeploy = transfer the soldiers out of Iraq, but keep them ready to provide security should anti-American terrorists find a safe haven.
That being said, the President and VP should be impeached immediately. So Winograd has that going for her.
The truth is neither candidate has all the answers. anybody who thinks otherwise should get their heads examined.
It bears mentioning that Marcy is also a member of Oprah's book club, if the reviews she writes on Amazon.com are any indication.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/cdp/member-reviews/AR2UUKE0P7GFL/002-9877600-3951241?_encoding=UTF8
Though surely a believer in the democratic process, she damn well circumvented it by rigging the Amazon star ratings system, submitting no less than 3 identical shining reviews for "The House of Sand and Fog". Scandalous enough to shatter a political career into a Million Little Pieces, eh?
And what did happened to Nick, Kathy's ex-husband, Marcy? What of Nick?
Marcy asks all the hard questions.
In the end, she was a mixed bag, not someone you hated, but surely not a character you loved.
Mister squid, I mistook you for one of those "you're throwing your vote away" jackasses. My bad. To atone for my badness, I will now tip you off to the existence of this awesome handmade Squid Attack messenger bag, for sale by its creator right now. You know you want it.
I have to side with Patrick the Venetian when it comes to Winograd's campaign issues. When it comes to things that turn me off of a candidate, having too many concrete ideas is way down on the list. It's not like her volunteers are out there chanting "Vote for Winograd and stick it to Prestone!" People who have heard of her at all know that she's the antiwar candidate.
Anonymous wrote:
Winograd's position on an immediate pullout is naive. We just blew up a country! We destroyed its internal security system! She does not support Murtha's position, which is the most sensible. Redeploy = transfer the soldiers out of Iraq, but keep them ready to provide security should anti-American terrorists find a safe haven.
Yeah, I sure hope anti-American terrorists don't find a safe haven anywhere in the Middle East. Why, if such a thing were to happen (and let us pray fervently that it doesn't!), I reckon we would have to turn right around and go occupy that place (wherever it may happen to be) until the anti-American terrorists jolly well stop being anti-American terrorists. After all, using our military might to turn countries full of anti-American terrorists into countries without anti-American terrorists is what we do best.
no we would not have to "go occupy that place". your sarcasm is not welcome. if camps sprung up, as they did in afghanistan, they should be immediately destroyed. no one should believe they can train militarily to attack the United States. had we acted properly with respect to UBL's camps in the 90's, we would not be in this predicament.
Had the CIA not funneled USD through the ISI to UBL and his MAK to build those camps, maybe 3K at the WTC wouldn't be RIP and we wouldn't all be SOL. Oooh, snap!
and your point is? the soviet occupation of afghanistan was also opposed with vigor by the same fanatics who brought us the iraq invasion. do your homework.
Let's see...Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. Bin Ladin in Afghanistan. Bin Ladin and CIA. CIA and Castro. Castro and the Mafia. The Mafia and Frank Sinatra. Frank Sinatra and Mia Farrow. Mia Farrow and Woody Allen. Woody Allen and Soon Yi Previn. Soon Yi Previn and Andre Previn. Andre Previn and the Nazis. The Nazis and Harrison Ford. Harrison Ford and Henry Ford. Henry Ford and the Jews.
DON'T YOU SEE, PEOPLE? IT'S THE DA VINCI CODE ALL OVER AGAIN!
OK, I did my homework. Now can I watch Good Times?
"Temporary layoffs! Easy credit rip-offs!"
"Scratchin and survivin'! (Something something something)!"
Hi Fellow! I was just searching blogs,and I found yours! I like it!
If you have a moment, please visit my vintage toys littlest pet shop site.
Good luck!
This is an excellent blog. Keep it going.You are providing
a great resource on the Internet here!
If you have a moment, please take a look at my automobile insurance coverage laws site.
Have a great week!
Very pretty design! Keep up the good work. Thanks.
»
Post a Comment
<< Home