I caught a bit of Bill Richardson on CNN this morning. Where I came in in the interview they were talking about the backlash Barak Obama is getting from his supporters for changing his position on the recent FISA bill passed in the Senate. From being opposed to the telecom immunities and saying he would filibuster if it was kept to voting for closure and the bill itself.

Richardson tries to explain away Obama’s position change saying in effect: “That’s just the realities of politics when running for president. He [Obama] has said when he’s in office he will see how the law is working and act accordingly.” What’s the realities? That you don’t have a spine? That special interests tell you what to do?

Then they change topics to energy and how the government is going to solve this supposed problem. They show a clip from an anti-McCain ad which critisizes him for wanting to allow drilling because it will take upwards of 7 years “to get the first drop of oil.” So complaining he doesn’t have a short term solution. The interviewer brings up that Obama doesn’t have much of a short term plan either. They quote things from his energy plan which go into effect in 2025, 2050, etc. Richardson hems and haws and beats around the bush. He just goes on to say that drilling is a good idea, as long as it’s not in nice places like Alaska.

Whatever the case these guys piss me off. Yes, I know, they are just acting like typical politicians but still. I’ve heard so much bullshit from people about how he’s different. Gotten into discussions on why he should be supported because he’s different. He’s not. It’s obvious to anyone not awestruck.

http://blog.wired.com/…

A group of high-profile progressive bloggers and libertarian Republicans are rolling out a new political action committee called Accountability Now to channel widespread anger over pending legislation that would legalize much of the president’s warrantless electronic surveillance of Americans, and grant retroactive legal immunity to telephone companies that cooperated with the spying when it was still illegal.

Progressive author and lawyer Glenn Greenwald, who writes for Salon, and blogger Jane Hamsher of Firedoglake are spearheading the effort. They’ve hired the political media consultants behind a historic Ron Paul online fundraising drive to organize a similar “moneybomb,” set to go off on August 8.

“That is the day Richard Nixon resigned, and the idea is that 35 years ago when you did this kind of stuff, you were forced out of office, and now congress drops everything to make your crimes legal,” says Hamsher in an interview.

The campaign marks a milestone in the evolution of online grassroots organizing. The PAC is cherry-picking the tactics and tools that proved most successful in the presidential primary campaigns, and is using them to corral online support for the single issue of domestic spying. The PAC’s money pay for advertisements in the districts of the House Democrats who voted for the spy bill — potentially causing problems for those capitulating on the Bush wiretapping program.

Key to the new effort are consultants Trevor Lyman and Rick Williams, whose successful online money-raising effort for Ron Paul, the libertarian-leaning Texas congressman, broke records last year. The pair masterminded a “moneybomb” drive called “This November 5th.” that brought in an unprecedented $4.2 million in contributions in a single day. A repeat effort in December raised another $6 million for Paul.

Now the pair have built a web page for Accountability Now where opponents of the spy bill can commit in advance to donating money to the PAC. Similar to the Ron Paul drives, netizens can grab Accountability Now badges to place on their blogs, which link back to the fundraising pledge page.

The moneybomb is only one out of several techniques, both online and off, that Hamsher’s Firedoglake is experimenting with to make offending members of congress feel the anger of their constituents.

Firedoglake has already hired Advomatic Designs in New York City and Advomatic Laboratories in Anchorage, Alaska to create an online VOIP widget that lets voters call their senators ask them what their stance is on the spy legislation, and to urge them to vote for an amendment that would remove the telecom immunity provision.

Using money its already raised, the group ran a full-page advertisement in the Washington Post Tuesday with bullet points explaining what’s wrong with the pending legislation.

The Senate is expected to follow the House in approving the new spy legislation Wednesday.

You can go to DownsizeDC.org to easily send the following message to your congress critters.

Please do everything you can to defeat the Senate version of HR 6304, the FISA Amendments Act of 2008. Please use your power to filibuster.

You can also send Barak Obama a message asking him to lead the fight in fighting this.

Update:

Arstechnica has a brief article on the Bingaman amendment which is causing some stir.

Instead of immediately granting retroactive immunity to telecoms being sued for their role in the NSA’s warrantless wiretapping program—or, what amounts to the same thing, instructing a federal court to grant such immunity—Bingaman would stay the suits until 90 after the delivery of a report by the Inspector General’s on the president’s secret surveillance programs. Immunity would still follow automatically at this point, but the provision might provide an incentive for the administration not to drag its feet in complying with the investigation, and it would give Congress the opportunity to reconsider once it actually knows what behavior it is immunizing. The Electronic Frontier Foundation and prominent immunity opponent Glenn Greenwald have both endorsed the amendment.

Perhaps tellingly, even this stay-and-delay provision is apparently unacceptable to Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell and Attorney General Michael Mukasey, who in a letter to Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) write:

Any amendment that would delay implementation of the liability protections in this matter is unacceptable. Providing prompt liability protection is critical to the national security. Accordingly, we, as well as the President’s other senior advisers, will recommend that the President veto any bill that includes such an amendment.

Pig Book 2008

http://www.cagw.org/…

Citizens Against Government Waste (CAGW) today released the 2008 Congressional Pig Book, the latest installment in an 18-year exposé of pork-barrel spending.

“When Congress adopted earmark reforms last year, there was hope that the number and cost of earmarks would be cut in half.  By any measure, that has not occurred,” said CAGW President Tom Schatz.

In fiscal year 2008, Congress stuffed 11,610 projects (the second highest total ever) worth $17.2 billion into the 12 appropriations bills.  That is a 337 percent increase over the 2,658 projects in fiscal year 2007, and a 30 percent increase over the $13.2 billion total in fiscal year 2007.  Alaska led the nation with $556 in pork per capita ($380 million total), followed by Hawaii with $221 ($283 million) and North Dakota with $208 ($133 million).  CAGW has identified $271 billion in total pork since 1991.

For the first time, the names of members of Congress were added to the projects.  The top three porkers were members of the Senate Appropriations Committee, beginning with Ranking Member Thad Cochran (R-Miss.) with $892 million; Senator Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) with $469 million; and Senator Richard Shelby (R-Ala.) with $465 million.

The Pig Book Summary profiles the most egregious examples, breaks down pork per capita by state, and presents the annual Oinker Awards.  All 11,610 projects are listed in a searchable database on CAGW’s website www.cagw.org.   Examples of pork in the 2008 Pig Book include:

 $3 million for The First Tee;
$1,950,000 for the Charles B. Rangel Center for Public Service;
$460,752 for hops research;
$211,509 for olive fruit fly research in Paris, France;
$196,000 for the renovation and transformation of the historic Post Office in Las Vegas;
$188,000 for the Lobster Institute in Maine; and
$148,950 for the Montana Sheep Institute.

“Americans do not send their hard-earned tax dollars to Washington so that Sen. Daniel Inouye can bring home $173 million in defense pork and receive the Pacific Fleeced Award or get sapped by $4.8 million going to wood utilization research, on which the government has spent $91 million since 1985,” concluded Schatz.

Only the 2nd highest pork year? Come on Congress… next year go for gold. Not like you have to tax us directly for much of it.

http://thirdpartywatch.com/…

I just got off the phone with Libertarian Party Executive Director Shane Cory and he confirms the following information: Former US Senator and Alaska House Speaker Mike Gravel has joined the Libertarian Party. Cory says he’ll provide more in a media release to be expected over the next few hours.

Gravel is currently one of the Democratic contenders for president. Wikipedia provides a bit of Gravel’s colorful background:

As Senator, Gravel became nationally known for his forceful but unsuccessful attempts to end the draft during the Vietnam War and for having put the Pentagon Papers into the public record in 1971 despite risk to himself. He conducted an unusual campaign for the Democratic nomination for Vice President of the United States in 1972, and then played a crucial role in getting Congressional approval for the Trans-Alaska pipeline in 1973. He was re-elected to the Senate in 1974, but gradually alienated most of his Alaskan constituencies and his bid for a third term was defeated in a Democratic primary election in 1980.

Third Party Watch covered Gravel’s endorsement of Green Party candidate Jesse Johnson here and Gravel’s libertarian streak here.

This should provide some refreshing news to those insisting that the right-left balance in the Libertarian Party is slightly out of whack. Gravel joins former Republican Rep. Bob Barr as a recent congressional addition to the Libertarian Party fold. Both Barr and current Rep. Ron Paul are “Life Members” of the LP.

He had indicated a few weeks back he’d consider a 3rd party run. Fairly recently there have been rumors he was going to run for the Libertarian Party nomination. Appears those were accurate. Some have called Gravel a left libertarian but anyone who supports national referendums and creates an organization which promotes direct democracy doesn’t seem to me to be all that interested in individual liberty. He’s better than any of those running in the main parties however by a long shot.

http://ronpaul2008.typepad.com/…

With the results of many of the “Super Tuesday” primaries and caucuses now finalized, the Ron Paul campaign is now projecting that it has at least 42 delegates to the national convention secured.

While much of the focus in yesterday’s Super Tuesday contests focused on preference poll numbers, Ron Paul caucus-goers were focused on securing delegates to the national convention.  With dedicated supporters and an organization focused purely on securing delegates, the campaign has secured more delegates to the national convention in Minneapolis-St. Paul than caucus straw polls might otherwise suggest.

According to campaign projections, a minimum of 24 delegates were won in yesterday’s contests.  When added to projected delegates coming from strong showings in Iowa (4), Nevada (8), Louisiana (3) and Maine (3), that brings the total delegate count to 42 delegates or more.

“Our goal has always been to walk into the national GOP convention with as many delegates as possible,” said Ron Paul 2008 campaign manager Lew Moore.  “The number of delegates we won yesterday could very well be the difference in a Convention where no one has a first-ballot majority.  With Dr. Paul’s home state of Texas coming up, we feel we can enter the convention with a substantial number of delegates.”

In an agreement first reported by West Virginia television station WSAZ, three Ron Paul delegates were secured through an agreement with the Mike Huckabee campaign at the West Virginia state convention early Tuesday.  Ron Paul delegates to the state convention swung their sizable support to Huckabee – putting Huckabee over the top – in exchange for the delegates.

According to campaign projections from last night’s results at least 3 delegates were won in Alaska, 5 delegates were won in North Dakota, 9 delegates were won in Minnesota, and 4 delegates were won in Colorado.

Additionally the results of the Louisiana Caucus may still change in favor of Ron Paul, where an ongoing legal challenge may result in most of that state’s delegates going towards Ron Paul after state GOP officials violated their own rules to improperly put delegates from other campaigns on the ballots.

Still 4th of 4 but we could pick up enough to force a brokered convention. Nick Bradley over at LRC has an interesting and optimistic projection.

1. After all the delegates are allocated in California, McCain will have well over 700 delegates; he won all but two of the counties (lost by a hair to Romney in Fresno and Shasta), so he should get all 173 delegates. In order to secure the nomination, he’ll need about half of the remaining 1,035 delegates, an unlikely feat.

2. As a result of the delegate reality for McCain, he will take Huckabee onto his ticket at a brokered convention that turns out to be little more than a formality. As the delegate count currently stands, McCain-Huckabee needs less than 300 delegates out of the remaining 1,035 to secure the nomination, less than 30%. I cannot envision any scenario where Paul and Romeny score enough delegates over the rest of the primaries to prevent a McCain-Huckabee majority.

3. If Huckabee has not already agreed to accept McCain’s VP slot, he will do so in a heartbeat. First, I have read repeatedly that McCain has made a private pledge to serve only one term, giving Huckabee a cleared field for 2012 if McHuckabee wins in November. If McHuckabee loses (which it probably will), Huckabee is “alive” for 2012, just like Edwards was for 2008 despite being out of office; Huckabee can go around the counrty for four years, extolling the virtues of the FairTax (during a severe recession, no less) and building grassroots support for a 2012 run.

4. Many conservatives will absolutely revolt over a McCain-Huckabee ticket, and will sit out the general or become suicide voters” and pull the lever for the democrat. This conservative angst, however, provides an excellent opening for a true conservative in the Goldwater-Taft mold to lead the exodus out of the party — Ron Paul. And if Hillary, who most democrats see as generally pro-war, is the democratic nominee, many of them will throw their lots in with the disgruntled conservatives and support Paul. Under such a scenario, Paul should have enough support get into the debates and take home a sizable chunk of the vote in Nobember. If Bloomberg jumps in and slices off the nanny state vote, probably split 60-40 to Hillary over McCain, Paul may even have a chance at winning. At this point, there aren’t many other options left.

I’m not sure if that or a 3rd party run starting after February makes more sense. Without knowing if Bloomberg or Nader will run it’s hard to decide. A 3rd party Paul run could pick up a decent chuck of votes but I doubt the 18% that Perot was able to get. The problem is time. By the time the R’s pick their guy the L’s will have chosen theirs. At that point I’m sure it’s too late to get yourself on the ballots anyway. I want to be able to vote for Paul in the general election… I just don’t know whether the almost guaranteed ballot access of the Libertarians is worth giving up the possible brokered convention where the revolution’s message could be argued at length and could grow the RLC and the libertarian wing of the party. While I appreciate what 3rd parties do and myself a member of the local Manhattan Libertarian Party, I believe given the current political state of affairs the path of least resistance for shrinking the state is by utilizing one of the two major parties. That or facilitate the Republican party’s downfall and absorb into the Libertarian party the libertarian wing or create a new liberty oriented party from it. That would allow traditional Reagan like conservatives from the LP to join that party and the LP could become what the Radicals want it to be.