Today's Story

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/11/AR2009111116943.html?hpid=topnews

The Catholic Church tells lawmakers in DC that if the law allowing same-sex marriage isn't overturned, they will be unable to continue aiding the city with programs that help the homeless, poor, and parent-less children.

More later.

The Real Health Care Bill

If you have been watching the news at all, you have heard about the massive happenings in the House Saturday afternoon. You've heard about the fanfare, the Speaker almost sobbing, the Republicans calling it a massive takeover of health care, Senator Graham declaring it dead on arrival in the Senate, and the Stupak Amendment, which will unprecedentedly rip away the reproductive rights of millions of women.

Before I discuss the Stupak Amendment, I want to quickly go over all of the positive aspects of the bill that few have spoken about.

If this was the bill that President Obama signed (thank God it won't be!) it would offer a consumer bill of rights of sorts for health insurance. No longer would someone be denied coverage and treatment due to past medical history, no longer would they be dropped, and health care would be able to be carried beyond states. An insurance marketplace would be created in order to make it easier, fairer, and more accessible to buy insurance policies. A public plan would be provided for a select few, in order to give more Americans health insurance. Good work.

Unfortunately, in the wee hours of Saturday morning, the Congress voted on an amendment

The game changer.

The Stupak Amendment dictates the following:

"No funds authorized under this act...may be used to pay for any abortion or to cover any part of the costs of that includes coverage of abortion...." except in cases of rape and incest or if it threatens the life of the mother.

Let us realize that the bolded section is the real big issue here. If it is translated very strictly, then any health care plan that covers any consumer that has a federal subsidy for health care cannot cover abortions any longer. Talk about "you'll be forced to change your company, whether you like it or not!" Talk about a bureaucrat getting in between you and your doctor!

Come on! This is the worst abortion restriction we've seen in modern American history. This is exactly the type of thing that we as Progressives, as Democrats, must fight against! This is a gross example of the inequalities of representation between men and women.

What does the Bible say about inequalities between men and female? Look no further than the second chapter of the Bible, Genesis 2:18, which states, in the original Hebrew version of the Bible, וַיֹּאמֶר יְהוָה אֱלֹהִים, לֹא-טוֹב הֱיוֹת הָאָדָם לְבַדּוֹ; אֶעֱשֶׂה-לּוֹ עֵזֶר, כְּנֶגְדּ. This literally translates into: "And the LORD God said: 'It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a help meet for him.'" It is widely recognized that "help meet" translates into, not a female or an assistant, but an "equal." Equal.

The Republicans, the Religious Right crazies that have taken over the party, have been able to successfully pervert the language of the Bible, so that many believe the Bible is anti-feminimism. If nothing else, the Book of Genesis can show us that there should be equal treatment under the law for women and men.

The Stupak Amendment is one huge step back for us. It will not be included in the final bill after conference, but just the fact that it passed the hurdles of the House is a sad thing for our American society.

House Passes Health Care

In the wee hours of Saturday morning, an amendment passed the House and was added to its health care reform bill. The amendment struck out any way federal money could be spent for abortions, excluding cases of rape, incest and where the mother's life would be threatened. Language was also struck out that would allow states to experiment with single payer systems.

Still, today is a great day for Progressives. We finally made it through the long and tough process of "bipartisanship" and debate and deliberation and came out with a gutless, but still game changing, health care reform bill. Yesterday, a majority of Congresspeople (220) voted for the bill, which would create a not-so-robust public option to complete in a public marketplace with the other private companies, along with many new regulations for the health care industry.

In the best way to illustrate what "bipartisanship" means in the American government, only one Republican- Rep. Cao, of Louisiana- voted in favor of passage of the bill.

Look out for a detailed description of the bill tomorrow here at Operation: Democracy, and what it means for Progressivism.

Until then!

FOCUS: NY-23rd

Yes, we got trounced in Virginia.

Yes, our incumbent got taken down in New Jersey.

But, fear not my fellow Progressives! These meant nothing.

As you may recall, I told you that Creigh Deeds, the Democrat in Virginia, was not a Progressive. He wasn't even a centrist Democrat. The man was a Rahm Emanuel Democrat. What do I mean by that title? Simply put, he was the type of Democrat only Rahm would recruit to run for Congress. Put it more bluntly: the guy was a DINO (That's right, Republicans! We can be clever too!) in that he was a Democrat, in name only. Deeds was pro-death penalty, pro-all-guns-rights, pro-war, pro-Conservative.

Governor Corzine's departure is something that we have needed for a while. He was unsympathetic to the concerns of his people. The Republican win in New Jersey is not at all a mandate to roll back all of the Progressive policies in New Jersey; rather, it is the People of New Jersey's way of rejecting the corruption and backwardness of the Corzine Administration.

The real way of showing where the People of America are is to look at the 23rd District of New York. This area was highly Republican-- the last time a Democrat won the district was 100 years ago-- and, two nights ago, it was decided for the Democrat. This Democrat is not Creigh Deeds. He isn't a Progressive's dream, either. But, the man who won this region, Representative-elect Bill Owens, is unequivocally supportive of the Middle Class, pro-health care reform, and pro-education. Simply put, Owens is the Progressive for that area, if not a Progressive through-and-through.

Think of that for a second. The exit polls in both New Jersey and Virginia, which accurately predicted the election results in both states, showed massive support for health care reform with a public option that was open to everyone. A robust public option. The Democrat's plan. The People of New York's 23rd showed their support for it in putting Owens into the House seat.

Don't listen to the pundits. It's not about a Republican regeneration. The elections were simply more people, angry with the status quo and in need of real change.

Projections, Part 2

Just to get the second and third projections of the Big 3 Elections in tonight before they come in through the news, I want to do quick ones.

Tonight or tomorrow, I'll explain in detail like I did for Virginia.

Race 2: NY 23- I'm very split on this race. It has been well over 100 years since a Democrat has won in the 23rd District of New York; indeed, either a Republican or Conservative party member has won this one. I will have to choose the Democrat, though. The Conservative, Doug Hoffman, has a good chance, but its my belief that most of those who were leaning towards Scozzafova will surely break to Democrat Bill Owens.

Race 3: New Jersey Governor- This is a very difficult one. If Governor Corzine loses, we can look at this as a voice of displeasure with Corzine, though, and not with the Democratic Party or with the Progressives, or even with the President. I say Corzine wins, as we may suspect that the traditionally blue state will keep their donkey. But! You never know. Its possible that we lose this seat. Like I said, though, it won't be New Jersey's way of throwing away Progressivism, just throwing away the ineffective and coarse Corzine.

Like I said, Operation: Democracy will go into more detail later on! Good luck to the Progressives in the local municipality races and the measures on Maine's ballot (a very interesting set of measures are located on it- check them out!)

McDonnell vs. Deeds: Virginia Governor Race

The gubernatorial race in Virginia is one of two governor elections taking place today. This election pits the poll-favored Republican, former state Attorney General Bob McDonnell, versus the underdog Democrat, State Senator Creigh Deeds.

Before we go any further, I want to put something into perspective. In the last two months of the 2008 campaign, I made a map of state projections for the Presidential Election. I missed only two. To complete the map, I looked at a number of things-- fundraising, state history, state party affiliations, etc.-- but I put some more weight in the polls than anything else. Some will tell you the old axiom of politics, that the only poll that matters is the General Election.

Honestly, though, that is garbage. Don't believe it.

Sure, there are times when the polls fail us. Usually, it is when the difference is one or two points out of the margin of error, but there are times when it is a big swing of the numbers. When the numbers are close, you put more emphasis on the other factors. When the numbers are far a part, you still keep all factors in vision, but, unless there is a huge variable, the winner of the poll is going to win the election.

With that said, Creigh Deeds, the Democrat, my party's choice, is in deep trouble. Worse than that, actually. Deeds doesn't have a chance. Real Clear Politics (RCP) has the average of polls for the Virginia race at about 55% to 41%. Even the DailyKos, a Progressive blog much like the one you're reading now, is showing the race at a huge disadvantage to the Democrat Deeds, with a 10% difference being reported (54%-44%).

What could possibly make my projection wrong? A huge tidal wave of voters flocking to the polls. A Democratic base that is excited for this candidate. All in all, a very different situation we see now.

The Tidal Wave or a Tide

The Virginia Democrats can pray to whatever deity they choose, and perform as many rain dances as they feel fit, but the wave is not coming. According to recent reports, the turnout looks to be very much like most mid-term elections in Virginia- small. Filled with Conservatives. And filled with Republicans. What does it all spell for Creigh Deeds, the Democrat that supports a woman's reproductive rights along with her right to own an AK-47? A long career in the State Legislature.

Apathetic Democrats

I don't blame the local Democrats for not traveling to the polls. Deeds has failed miserably to give the donkeys in the Southern state something to be excited about. Why would anyone get excited about Senator Deeds? He is a Conservative Democrat going against an even more Conservative Republican in an historically red state. The Washington Post points out that only 75% of voters leaning for Deeds are excited or fairly excited about his candidacy, compared to over 90% of those voting for McDonnell. Here's why:

• Deeds is a big supporter of guns rights. So is McDonnell.
• Deeds is an even bigger supporter of the death penalty, even for minors and even for people who contributed to the killing of an individual but didn't actually kill the person. So is McDonnell.
• Deeds supports making English the official language of America and is a fool when it comes to immigration reform. So is McDonnell.

So am I melancholy about the Virginia race? Not at all. A Conservative Democrat is not my Democrat. I don't support a purging of the party like what is happening to the Republicans. Yet, there has to be some type of common belief in our party, and that is definitely not illustrated with the inclusion of Deeds. Our party should encompass the center and the left. It shouldn't be center-right.

If McDonnell wins, Democrats don't face a problem. The DailyKos poll that showed McDonnell winning by a 10-point spread also illustrated that Virginians haven't lost this Progressive-resurgence we've been seeing. In the poll, Virginians were asked whether they supported or opposed a robust public option. Overwhelmingly, those polled in Virginia support it (50%-41%).

This race won't be an illustration of a Conservative resurgence. If anything, it is an example of a desire for more Progressive candidates in the South.

Rush On, Fox!

Rush Limbaugh was given a thirty minute spot on the Fox News channel to harp on his crazy, ideology-driven hate rhetoric.

Take that, Valerie Jarrett and the Obama Administration! Fox is not biased. Jeesh!

There are a few things I'd like to take him to task for. Some things he said on the program. You can watch it all in video parts here. Obviously, anytime Rush Limbaugh opens that vile mouth of his, I want to take him to respond and close it for him. The two biggest statements, though, are the ones we'll be discussing.

Statement One: "It was Barack Obama and the Democratic Party which actively sought the defeat of the U.S. military.

While Rush was questioning President Obama's ability to lead as the Commander-In-Chief and his commitment to the US Troops, he stated this little sliver of ideological hate. In his opinion, the Democratic attempt during the Bush Error to end the unnecessary War in Iraq was our attempt at destroying the military and giving victory to "the terrorists."

Please! It has been obvious since the very beginning of the war that Iraq posed no threat to us. It was the lack of a connection between Saddam Hussein and Usama bin Laden, the elusive WMD, and the dire number of world citizens dying due to the campaign that pushed the Democrats to do something. In fact, it was the Democrats that tried to save the military. We wanted our men and women out of harm's way so that their services could be used when necessary, to keep us safe, and when all other options were exhausted. Some will lead you to believe that is an illustration of

Statement 2: "We've never seen such a radical at this level of power...this is just outrageous what's been happening, the denial of liberty, the attack on freedom..."

First of all, the idea that President Obama is a radical is completely ridiculous. He is center-left at best, especially on the economy. A third of the rather modest recovery act that was passed earlier this year was tax cuts. A radical would have raised taxes! We need to realize that the act itself was much less Progressive than what we were told, unfortunately.

The most "radical" president we've ever had was during the Great Depression. President Roosevelt was a "liberal," seen by many Democratic Socialists as the best leader we've ever had in the Oval Office, along with much of the country, and is generally seen as one of the top three leaders we've ever seen. While he was in power, the government spent more as a percentage of GDP than the present Administration. He helped lift us out of the Great Depression. So, hey. Maybe Progressives can do something right!

As for what Rush said about the denial of liberty and the attacks on freedom, the only thing I have to say to him is this: the PATRIOT ACT, the thing you have supported. Twice.

For a bit of irony, Rush Limbaugh called President Obama's ego "out of this world." Yeah, Rush. But it hasn't reached you yet...you're still God.

Sorry for the delay

Sorry all!

I was out this weekend and could not really get to a computer to update Operation: Democracy.

As an update, last week's radio show was a pretty good success. This week, Thursday at 9:00 pm, if you don't listen then...then you aren't a real American!

Kidding. We're not like Fox News around here.

I may be adding a second hour-long show during the week, possibly Tuesday. Look out for it!

Tomorrow we'll be adding stories and continuing like usual!

Until then,

BobbyWit