Montana Left Blogs

A challenge

Wed, 03 Sep 2008 23:02:54 GMT

I keep hearing McCain’s campaign complain about the sexist coverage of Sarah Palin?in the media. I’d like to see one example. No…not from “Billy’s Homemade Political Blog” but from CNN, MSNBC, FOX, etc. What kind of country does McCain want if it is forbidden to ask questions about a vice presidental candidate? I would hope [...]

Best Prices - Discount Catalogs

Sun, 01 Aug 2010 02:08:31 GMT

The Promise of Neo-Feudalism

Sat, 31 Jul 2010 18:13:31 GMT

by JC Problembear’s post the other day about letting the Bush tax cuts for the rich expire has sparked a lively debate between Big Swede and Mr. Benson, and pb and I. The governing philosophy on their side it seems, is this notion that the more money the rich have, the more jobs they will [...]

Dennis Rehberg Really Hates Firefighters

Sat, 31 Jul 2010 01:04:52 GMT

I have a feeling we won?t be reading any tweets or seeing any clumsy YouTube videos about Representative Rehberg?s latest embarrassing vote?a vote to protect the interests of foreign companies at the expense of first responders from 9/11: The James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act of 2009, sponsored by Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-N.Y.), would [...]

...it bears mentioning...

Fri, 30 Jul 2010 21:55:15 GMT

Jorge Quintana, via Twitter: "What? @DennyRehberg sues firefighters in Billings and votes No on 9/11 responders bill http://tinyurl.com/3alqp4p Just shameful."

Yup. Here's the roll call.

Classy.

"When angry, count to four. When very angry, swear."

Fri, 30 Jul 2010 20:16:14 GMT

So House Republicans defeated a bill that would have provided health care for the workers that rushed to New York City after 9/11 to help with the recovery and cleanup work. You know, the people George W Bush used as a prop for his famous bullhorn at Ground Zero speech.

Why? Well, according to Texas Representative Joe Barton, it's up to New Yorkers to take care of their own mess.

Hey! Ho!

This is the appropriate response:

Naturally, this kind of anger isn't expressed by the Democratic policy-makers. Instead, we're seeing a lot of folks cave on key issues that represent the will of a majority of American voters. Here's Paul Krugman, on Obama's tendency to "alienate {his} friends" and "woo...people who will never waver in their hatred..."

What explains Mr. Obama's consistent snubbing of those who made him what he is? Does he fear that his enemies would use any support for progressive people or ideas as an excuse to denounce him as a left-wing extremist? Well, as you may have noticed, they don't need such excuses: He's been portrayed as a socialist because he enacted Mitt Romney's health-care plan, as a virulent foe of business because he's been known to mention that corporations sometimes behave badly.
The point is that Mr. Obama's attempts to avoid confrontation have been counterproductive. His opponents remain filled with a passionate intensity, while his supporters, having received no respect, lack all conviction. And in a midterm election, where turnout is crucial, the "enthusiasm gap" between Republicans and Democrats could spell catastrophe for the Obama agenda.

The same could be said of politicians closer to home. Here's some advice: you won't win any elections by demoralizing your base, and pandering to those that won't vote for you anyway.

Update -- Worth noting -- Congressman Rehberg is among those who voted against this bill.

let bush tax cuts for the rich die.

Fri, 30 Jul 2010 04:39:32 GMT

http://www.wtsp.com/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=138218&catid=8?bctid=292314103001 by problembear the wealthy shouldn’t just be taxed more. we should demand our money back. warren buffet agrees the demise of the bush tax cuts will be a good thing for america. for those of us who make less than $200,000.00 per year, there is little to worry about according to this wall street [...]

Best Prices - Discount Catalogs

Sun, 01 Aug 2010 02:08:31 GMT

organic latex mattress reviews

now i am mad?.

Fri, 30 Jul 2010 00:05:26 GMT

by problembear i thought i had met the vilest form of evil in payday lenders until i heard about these grave robbers who boldly pick the gold fillings out of the teeth of our fallen soldier’s greiving families. when the hell are the people of this once-proud and decent country going to start demanding some [...]

a unique artist/provocateur passes

Thu, 29 Jul 2010 00:45:50 GMT

by problembear like Gahan Wilson and Gary Larson, John Callahan was a cartoonist of the dark side of life. he depicted what people think but never utter in polite society. i like that in any artist. so long John. it’s been good to know you. many people, when confronted with John’s dark humor for the [...]

Tester, Baucus obstruct Senate reform

Wed, 28 Jul 2010 15:25:31 GMT

Holy smokes! According to this Hill article, "Democratic leaders in both the House and Senate are pushing for filibuster reform at the start of the new Congress next year."

Great, right? Fantastic! What I've been calling for...for ages! Let's get it started -

What's that? There are Democrats that oppose this? "Five Senate Democrats" said they wouldn't support filibuster reform, and "another four lawmakers say they are wary about such a change"? What? How's that? It must be what Steve Benen said, that "most of the support" for filibuster reform "comes from newer members of the chamber, but it's the Dems who've been around for a while...who are most inclined to keep things the way they are, regardless of the consequences to the institution or the country, right?

It's a reminder that no one wants to give up a weapon they might want to use themselves someday. Republicans are abusing procedural rules now to undermine a progressive agenda, and some Dems are no doubt thinking they'll be able to abuse those same rules down the road.
Sen. Daniel Akaka (D-Hawaii) told The Hill, "I think we should retain the same policies that we have instead of lowering it.... I think it has been working."
I don't know what Senate Akaka has been watching, but it doesn't sound like this one.
With the Senate Democratic majority due to shrink, and Republicans becoming more hysterically conservative, these anti-reform Dems are inviting a disaster -- a government incapable of passing legislation.

So when we hear Max Baucus opposes filibuster reform, we shouldn't be surprised. After all, as a "moderate," he's one of the Senators you have to custom-tailor a bill for in order to avoid a filibuster. Pork! Pork! Pork! For Montana! And an effective roadblock to pass any law that would protect or benefit ordinary Americans over Baucus' constituents. Like WellPoint, say. Or maybe, as former Senator Fritz Hollings claims, the filibuster allows Senators to do more fundraising. Ending the filibuster would crimp the fundraising of the Baucuses of the Senate.

But not someone like Tester, right? Not a freshman Senator elected on a wave of populist progressive fervor. Whose supporters slogged in the rain to ensure he represented Montana as a reformer in the US Senate? That he do his best to help end the bitter partisanship that marred Congress in recent years? That he work for the people of the state, and not the varied deep-pocketed interests that have held the Senate - and the country - hostage?

Wrong.

Sen. Jon Tester, a freshman Democrat from Montana, disagrees with some of his classmates from more liberal states.
"I think the bigger problem is getting people to work together," he said. "It's been 60 for a long, long time. I think we need to look to ourselves more than changing the rules."

Seriously, I'm flabbergasted.

Speechless.

I mean, where do you start with this? Yes, the filibuster has been in effect for a long time. But its use for standard legislation is a new and radical change:

But even a cursory glance at the proceedings of the 110th Senate shows something is clearly different this time. Republican leaders are evoking filibusters at a torrid pace, seemingly intent on blocking nearly every piece of legislation that comes across their desks, even measures with wide Republican support.
During the Legislature's first session, which ended in January, the majority was compelled to invoke 78 cloture votes, an average of more than one a week. And things seem to be repeating themselves in the second session, with 44 cloture motions as of June 13, for a total of 116 so far in the 110th Congress.
By contrast, the previous record was 61 cloture votes during the entire 107th Congress of 2001-2002. Republicans are on track to triple that total by the time the second session closes next year.

Compare that to earlier sessions of Congress. Between 1917 and 1963, "the procedure was invoked only five times."

A quick glance at the history of the filibuster shows that, in its original inception, it wasn't intended to block votes on legislation, but to foster debate. Senators had to actually debate on the floor to delay a vote on a bill until 1975, when the "virtual" filibuster was allowed. Now, all you need to do is announce you're filibustering, and - voila! - 60 votes are required.

Rachel Maddow:

Republicans now have a defacto standing filibuster on practically everything. They've made so that passing anything in the Senate requires sixty votes, a super majority every time. This situation has never existed before. This was not the situation in any previous Congress ever. Really. I know the beltway reporting makes it seem like sixty is normal. This is the way it's always been. Democrats did it too when they were in the minority.
It is not true. This really has never happened before in the history of the U.S. Senate....

Under current Senate filibuster rules, Montana's Mike Mansfield couldn't have forced Strom Thurmond to continue debate indefinitely on the Civil Rights Act of 1957, thus ensuring its passage after a 24-hour marathon speech by the segregationist.

And Michael Tomasky reminds us that requiring a supramajority on all votes was distinctly not what our nation's constitutional architects envisioned for a functioning national legislature. "[The Senate] was never supposed to prevent action when clear majorities backed something,
writes Tomasky, "as frequently happens today." And he quotes James Madison, "opposing supramajority requirments in all but a few cases (treaty approval, ouster of members)":

In all cases where justice or the general good might require new laws to be passed, or active measures to be pursued, the fundamental principle of free government would be reversed. It would be no longer the majority that would rule; the power would be transferred to the minority.

So, no, Senator Tester, this is decidedly not how the Senate has historically gone about its business, and the current filibuster has not been around a long time.

As for "getting people to work together..." I'm not sure what Tester means by that. Getting Republicans to support Democratic legislation? Um...you'd have thought even Senator Tester's short-lived experience in the US Senate would show him the folly of that kind of thinking. This isn't the Montana legislature of a decade ago, Senator Tester.

Today's Republicans are deliberately sabotaging legislation that would ameliorate the nation's economic woes with an eye on worsening the economy for the 2012 elections. Today's Republicans are deliberately sabotaging any climate change legislation, wooing the money and support of energy conglomerations and paying lip service to AM-radio-fueled Beckian paranoia. These are not people you can work with, Senator Tester.

This is not why we elected you US Senator for the state of Montana.

The Prince of the Rimrocks: Raising Insurance Rates for Your Local Fire Department

Wed, 28 Jul 2010 02:47:15 GMT

How might Representative Rehberg?s decision to suddenly embrace litigation when it gives him the chance to sue and city and its firefighters impact you? Oh, just decreased safety and increased taxes because of insurance costs, says East Helena Fire Chief Bill Wegner: Wegner added that if the Billings loses the case it would be an [...]

congratulations mike and everyone at summit independent living

Tue, 27 Jul 2010 02:17:51 GMT

by problembear from this website: http://www.summitilc.org/ On July 26th through July 28th Summit, the Statewide Independent Living Council, and Montana’s Centers forIndependent Living will be holding the 2010 Statewide Independent Living Symposium and Youth Symposium at the Hilton Garden Inn in Missoula. In commemoration of the 20th Anniversary of the Americans with Disabilities Act, there [...]

Battleground House races: It's Hammerquist-time!

Mon, 26 Jul 2010 17:18:44 GMT

Okay, folks. First up, Will Hammerquist, Democratic candidate for HD

To begin with, Hammerquist is a native of the Flathead valley. His parents moved to the area in the 1970s. His father started out working on a ranch, then later got into the building business. His mother, a nurse, initially worked in the hospital in Browning. They settled in Creston, where Will grew up. He attended Flathead HS, and then Montana State with a degree in economics and political science.

Hammerquist has an interesting resume. During college, he was a student lobbyist for MSU students; afterward, no doubt influenced and abetted by his father's building business, he was director of member services for the Montana Contractors' Association. After his stint with the contractors, Hammerquist joined the campaign staff of Lt. Governor John Boehlinger, and later served in the governor's office as a policy adviser. His latest gig is with the National Parks Conservation Association,where he serves as program manager for the Northern Rockies regional office, where he's been instrumental in protecting the North Fork of the Flathead River from Canadian oil, gas, and mining activity.

The thrust of his campaign? Jobs.

In case you're not from the Flathead, the county has been struggling with joblessness. According to the Flathead Beacon, joblessness is down from its record-setting mark in March, but obviously double-digit unemployment (which fails to include the long-term unemployed) is a problem.

Hammerquist is campaigning around job creation, proposing ways to bring startup business to Flathead county, find workforce training money, and incentives for keeping money in the local economy. In a short telephone interview with Hammerquist, Will mentioned using more of the in-state lending program money for small business lending (much of money is currently invested in the bond market, which shows lower return than on local business investment). He also stumped for a "made in Montana" campaign, similar to the "Jersey Fresh" campaign.

And he favors giving local and small businesses a break or vacation from the state's business equipment tax.

In short, he knows the needs of his community, and is thinking about concrete ways to address problems.

Don't let the website of his opponent, Derek Skees, fool you. On the site, Skees depicts himself as a reasonable, apolitical "statesman." Nothing could be farther from the truth. A fund-raising letter sent by Skees reveals that he thinks he was "called by God" to run for political office. He's also a member of the divisive and ueber-partisan Tea Party coalition, on whose survey, Skees revealed that he thinks he has a special mission to be a legislator, and besides Ron Paul, the "most influential human being in his life" is the vituperative Father Coughlin of the 21st century, Glenn Beck. Cowgirl also has video of Skees distributing "The 5000-year Leap," which James Conner describes as "Willard Cleon Skousen's notorious tome that's become a bible for the teabaggers."

In the Leap, Skousen argues that the U.S. Constitution is based on the Bible, not on Enlightenment philosophy as most mainstream historians contend. Glenn Beck, like Skousen a Mormon, wrote the forward to the current edition of the book, which is popular among those teabaggers who favor making the U.S. a theocracy.
According to the Northwest Montana Patriots, Skees "...teaches a class on the 5,000 Year Leap and the U.S. Constitution every week to a large group." On his campaign's website, Skees promises to "...measure every aspect of my office through the?Founders Basic Principles (Skees' link to ?The Leap) and vote only to their measure."

If setting up an American theocracy is your cure, Skees is your man.

But then, as Hammerquist himself says, "whacky-ism doesn't create jobs."

Two things:

Donate. Now. I've set up a LiTW Hammerquist page, and created an easy goal: $300.

This is easy. You folks could do this in your sleep. Three hundred. Donate what you can: five bucks, ten bucks, fifty bucks.

The second, for the Missoula-bound: Will's having a fundraiser in the Garden City on Wednesday. Here's the info from the info:

What: Will Hammerquist for Montana House Event
Date: Wednesday, July 28th
Time: 6:00 PMPlease

Hosts: Kevin & Jodi Hammond
Co-Hosts:
Dave Wanzenried
Tara Jensen
Greg Lind
Matt Singer
Cynthia Wolken
Jessica Grennan
Betsy Hands
Jennifer Hensley
Land Tawny
Matt Leow & Sarah Cobler
Julie Hammerquist
Dave McAlpin
Ellie Boldman Hill

Three Facts about Will:
~Endorsed by MT Conservation Voters
~Not Accepting any PAC or Corporate Funds
~Works for non-profit conservation organization

Email me for location and other information.

Random Thoughts

Mon, 26 Jul 2010 23:31:27 GMT

It's really rude when you're accomplishing things and you have to stop for a wimpy thunderstorm wannabe. If you take a look at a chart of my web traffic over the last two weeks, it seems to spell "Aman". What...

Three strikes, and we're out of political will

Mon, 26 Jul 2010 13:31:36 GMT

The freefall has begun. The US Senate has abandoned any notion of passing any kind of meaningful reform, and seems to be content to sit tight and watch the 2010 elections. Over the past week, the Senate has punted on some major issues that essentially say they're done.

To wit:

The Cobell settlement was rejected by the US Senate. It was stripped from a war-funding bill. Harry Reid blamed Republicans, but as Indian Country Today's Rob Capriccioso pointed out, plenty of Democrats had to oppose the amendment for it to fail cloture, 46-51. Republicans - led by Wyoming's John Barrasso - do keep trying to "modify" the settlement in ways Cobell opposes, but it's unclear if the filibusterers here were voting against the settlement, or tacking on unrelated additional spending (there were other domestic measures in the bill besides the Cobell settlement) to the Afghanistan funding bill. So, it either failed because the Senate opposes the settlement, or because they're beholden to deficit hawks. Either way, it's a fail for the Senate.

Cobell is bringing the settlement back to the House. As Gwen Florio notes, the "most recent deadline - there have many, with many delays - for congressional approval of the settlement is Aug. 6."

From a planetary perspective, the Senate abandoning of a climate change bill is even worse. Harry Reid said simply he doesn't have the votes to pass a bill. Worse still, the abandonment of the climate in the Senate presages a complete collapse of any political will to work on climate issues:

The result is an undeniable defeat in stemming climate change in this country. It echoes overseas also with other countries wondering about American resolve on a global issue. The high-wire deal struck in a climate change conference last year in Copenhagen to reduce emissions by 17 percent by 2020 looks very far away.
But the wreckage isn't complete. California will face a challenge to its AB32 law cutting greenhouse emissions on the ballot in November. Also, GOP gubernatorial candidate Meg Whitman wants to hit the pause button on the law if elected. Keeping this law on the books becomes a higher priority than ever.
The Obama administration may also take an extra step in the battle by using existing federal laws to crack down on carbon emissions, a regulatory showdown it wanted to avoid with the legislative package that's now dead. Whether it has the will to do so, after the Senate defeat, remains in doubt.

Spectacular fail.

Finally, Republican Senators tried to block the US DoJ from challenging the recent Arizona immigration law. It failed, but the bad news here is that both Jon Tester and Max Baucus voted with Republicans on the issue. It's an astounding vote, frankly. For starters, the bill attempts to dictate to Justice what cases they should pursue. For another matter, while Tester has always been hawkish on immigration, the Arizona law is irreconcilable with the kind of individual civil liberties issues Jon's always championed in the past. How can you be an outspoken opponent of Real ID - and a supporter of Arizona's immigration law? Real ID at least has the benefit of being applied uniformly to all citizens, while Arizona's papers check would be haphazardly applied without document standards, and by local authorities with all of their biases and no oversight. And Tester, at least, has an election coming up and a history of drifting towards nativist positions on immigration. What's Baucus' excuse here?

As Netroots Nation friend Paul Hogarth blogged today, the Senate is where "progressive legislation goes to die."

If there's one major frustration leading into November, it's the U.S. Senate - where Republicans have obstructed practically everything that passed the House. Reid came to the Conference on July 24th - right after announcing we "don't have the votes" for comprehensive climate change reform this year, only adding insult to injury. One panel on filibuster reform suggested we're in a constitutional crisis, but Reid himself wouldn't commit to any specific solution.

And the solution?

But rather than give up, Al Franken reminded the netroots that Senators elected in 2006 and 2008 with their help are a "coalition of the impatient" - and represent a new generation of more progressive Democrats. Bloggers are needed this November to add to their ranks, in order to change the Senate.

Well...it's a nice thought. And I do think our progressive resurgence moved too quickly, allowing too many politicians from earlier eras of appeasement staff the chairs of vital Congressional committees. We do need better representatives.

But I'm still staggered - especially on climate change - how spectacular our political failures have been.

?We need to find a different solution?

Sun, 25 Jul 2010 19:19:00 GMT

By JC Continuing on with our annual discussion about the conflict downtown–spurred on by City Councilor Bob Jaffe’s remarks on his listserve– between shoppers, tourists, visitors and businesses vs. the homeless, transient, “serial inebriates” and the mentally ill, today’s Missoulian digs a little deeper into the details (thanks liz for your attention to this issue, [...]

Making the move

Fri, 23 Jul 2010 07:01:22 GMT

Montanans sue for domestic partner rights

Fri, 23 Jul 2010 17:36:37 GMT

This happened yesterday:

Seven committed same-sex couples today filed a lawsuit against the state of Montana for failing to provide legal protections to same-sex couples and their families in violation of the Montana Constitution's rights of privacy, dignity and the pursuit of life's basic necessities and its guarantees of equal protection and due process. The goal of this lawsuit is ensure that same-sex couples are able to protect their families with the same kind of legal protections that opposite-sex couples are offered through marriage.
Because there is a constitutional amendment in Montana barring marriage for same-sex couples, the couples in the lawsuit are seeking the protection of state-recognized domestic partnerships, similar to those in place in several other states.

It's right there in the preamble. "We the people of Montana," it begins, "desiring to improve the quality of life, equality of opportunity and to secure the blessings of liberty for this and future generations do ordain and establish this constitution." If you haven't read Montana's constitution yet, do so. It's elegant and striking.

Like section 3, on "Inalienable Rights." "All persons are born free," states the constitution, "and have certain inalienable rights. They include the right to a clean and healthful environment and the rights of pursuing life's basic necessities, enjoying and defending their lives and liberties, acquiring, possessing and protecting property, and seeking their safety, health and happiness in all lawful ways."

Or section 4, on "Individual Dignity," which states simply, "No person shall be denied the equal protection of the laws."

Seems like a slam dunk, doesn't it? And, as Dan Savage notes, this isn't a lawsuit for gay marriage, but for domestic partnership rights:

And there won't be any protest from defenders of marriage because these same-sex couples aren't seeking the right to wed. All they're demanding is that the state of Montana recognize domestic partnerships. So, again, we can expect no protests from the defenders of marriage... right? And if defenders of marriage should protest or attempt to block domestic partnerships for same-sex couples-like they did in Hawaii-all the folks who are constantly urging gays and lesbians to be reasonable and settle for civil unions or domestic partnerships will loudly condemn the defenders of marriage for being unreasonable... right?

We know Savage is being facetious, because Montana conservatives are sure to do some ALCU- and gay-bashing over this lawsuit. You saw what happened when Missoula passed its anti-discrimination ordinance, you see what's going on in Helena over the specter of telling kids that gay parents exist. Heck, right in the GOP platform is a call to outlaw gays.

Still, it's possible the ACLU and the seven couples who initiated the suit will win. And that will be good.

On a personal note, kudos to Missoula's Casey Charles for being one of the litigants. He was a colleague and friend at the university, and I'm not at all surprised at his courage and tenacity here.

Gore

Fri, 23 Jul 2010 23:12:51 GMT

Here's the thumb after a week plus days. And if any one wants to give me static that it ain't so bad, you try tying a barrel knot with that. I dare you.

Your Favorite Bumper Sticker Sucks

Fri, 23 Jul 2010 23:12:51 GMT

There's an old adage popularized on pickup truck bumpers throughout Montana: A bad day fishing is still better than a good day working. I wish to take issue with that, right here and now. I just came off the river...

Senators Tester and Baucus Pander to the Right Wing on Immigration

Thu, 22 Jul 2010 20:56:41 GMT

I?m still reeling from Senator Tester?s decision to work on balancing the budget on the backs of the unemployed, and now today, I learn that he supports the right of states to impose racial profiling schemes, the Flathead Beacon reports. At a federal court hearing today, ACLU lawyer Omar Jadwat described the law: "We are [...]

If You Are Going To Headline a Story?

Thu, 22 Jul 2010 08:05:25 GMT

?Community supports board?s decision to revise curriculum,? shouldn?t you?uh?have some support for the claim?

Rehberg Is The Luckiest SOB Ever

Thu, 22 Jul 2010 23:06:42 GMT

Just when the story of how money-grubbing little ass-munch Dennis Rehberg is suing his bosses for actually doing the jobs they are paid to do is heating up, along comes little Andy notBreitnotsmart with a doctored video about how an...

They Are Shameless?Just Shameless

Thu, 22 Jul 2010 22:26:15 GMT

Etouffee

Tue, 20 Jul 2010 22:49:08 GMT

There you go. folks. It is as savory as any thing could be. I can finally, after all this while, say "Been there, done that." Roux was cooked on the stovetop, and the sauce is much darker than it looks...

More Lies from the Rehbergs

Sun, 18 Jul 2010 16:41:48 GMT

I guess I shouldn?t be surprised that someone who claims to support veterans while voting repeatedly against their interests would be willing to lie in a lawsuit and to the media to trash firefighters who risked their lives to save his scrub brush, but this Rehberg lawsuit is getting stranger by the day. Remember how [...]

Another clue to how the right sees the world

Thu, 29 May 2008 19:54:17 GMT

Rachel Ray and Dunkin’ Donuts=terrorist sympathizers. Paranoid much?

Enough about Hillary and Obama?let?s talk about me!

Sat, 10 May 2008 03:51:40 GMT

Is it possible that all this time I just thought I had a big mouth when in fact I simply have an inflated ego? Could it be a combination of both? Probably. Today I suggested, perhaps in an inappropriate forum, that it was time for the party to unify behind Barack Obama. I was shocked [...]

Will Lou Dobbs accept responsibility?

Fri, 03 Apr 2009 20:56:03 GMT

No he won’t.

So all this sh*t went down?

Fri, 02 Oct 2009 04:47:06 GMT

…and here i am in Canada….