Ghosts in the Wings

The 2008 federal elections. One is in the democratic party primary. It exists in the form of two people either of who could easily dominate any of the present contenders. The second is in the high number of republican’s not seeking another term.

Last week Al Gore won the Nobel Peace prize for his work on Global Climate change. While many were quick to put forward the notion that this was for his work on An Inconvenient Truth, Gore has been a long standing advocate for Global Climate change science. Ever since his days at Harvard where he studied under one of the founders of the field Gore has been an advocate about taking the cautious road when it comes to Global Warming, and its associate problems. As a Senator and Congressmen, Gore advocated for an increase in funding to study the problem. Just like Al Gore was responsible for the creation of the commercial internet (yeah, that’s right), Al Gore also bares some responsibility for the wide spread understanding that global climate change is a problem (inconvenient Truth), and also for our ability to conceptualize the impacts via scientific data he as a legislator sought to provide. Back when Al Gore was VP, he flew into Kyoto, and when there looked like there wasn’t going to be an agreement Al Gore politicked it into reality. This accompanied by his book on the Bush administration, Clinton credentials, wry whit, and powerful leadership means that at any time he could throw his hat in and become a viable candidate. Moreover, he has tons of energy going his way. Think of the Star power he could muster?

The other ghost in the wings in the Democratic primary is not so much a person but a duo, Stephan Colbert and Jon Stewart. Colbert has already thrown his hat in the ring for both the democratic and republican primaries in South Carolina, and he did it in character two, which makes me a little nervous. Jon Stewart on the other hand doesn’t have a character. As a result if Jon Stewart chose to enter the race the transition from comedian to candidate would be much smoother then Colbert who would have to place his bets solely on the Colbert Nation. Jon has well established credibility particularly on other news program, for instance Cross Fire. Below are two embedded Youtube videos with links to an interview he did with Bill Moyers, if you watch that video you know that Jon Stewart would rock some serious socks if he got into the races.

Part-2
Part-3
Part-4

My favorite quote, “I would love to do an interview where it just sorta deconstructed the talking points of the Iraq war.” I am such a debate nerd.

Unfortunately for the party faithful, myself included, it’s highly unlikely that either of these two forces will enter into the election race. In the case of Gore, I think it’s an unwillingness to stress his personal friendship with Bill Clinton any further. There was an extremely interesting article in this month’s Vanity Fair discussing their relationship, and I believe that in fact there are serious issues in that friendship. It’s obviously a relationship that he values, and gore is still pretty young. Plus I think he’s happy where he is. But he could win. Colbert won’t/can’t seriously enter into the race. The way in which he has constructed his show/act restricts him. As a result he can get a bridge in Hungry named after him (sorta), but he won’t be able to translate it across to people who are only tangentially familiar with him. Jon Stewart has yet to be show interest beyond being the clown. He has deep held beliefs, cutting insight, and a good sense of humor. While he cares about the issues, I think he has a post-Nixonian sense of cynicism about the political process. On one hand this sense of cynicism keeps Stewart real, but on the other hand it means that in order for Stewart to try and save us from ourselves things are going to have to get pretty bad. Jon Stewart is like a lump of coal becoming a diamond. The worse and more absurd things get the brighter he sparkles. I just hope his luster is bright enough to keep out the darkness that seems to be engulfing us.

One a completely different note, I have been thinking about the other big election coming in 2008 the House and Senate elections. I was going to write about this anyway today, but I thought a discussion of dream scenarios for the Democrats would off set this discussion of a possible nightmare.

The 2008 election could be a bellwether year for the Democrats, however sings are indeterminate. While the nation suffers from Iraq Fatigue, and political destruction under the Bush administration and a sizable republican minority that seems to be very adept at stalling, there are a few signs that things may not be an easy victory. What arose my concern was the failure of the democrats to override a veto on health care, the failure of the SCHIP bill marks a serious failure on the part of Democratic congressional leadership, and spells serious trouble for their excellent (as it stood the last time I heard a report on it) FISA bill, and other issues down the pipe. If the Dems can’t win health care, and they haven’t done much yet on anything else, what is the incentive for the Democratic wave to keep cresting? This lack of legislative record, and the retiring of Senators, and Congressmen with controversial records may mean previously secure seats are more open then they have been in ages, but it also means that they face republican’s without a record. It almost puts the Democrats ina parliamentary position where they need to pick up more seats to govern but can’t pick up those seats without being in power, but unlike a parliamentary government there aren’t any other parties to form and break coalitions with. At least some other people are aware of this situation too. This was a post I found on the NY times blog section. If the Dems are aware of what’s going on then we need Granny to put on some combat boots, because if Pelosi and Reid can’t get shit straight we may be in as a bumpy ride, and I really don’t want to move to Canada.

Stephan Colbert and the Race for The White House.

Last night on the Colbert Report Steven Colbert announced that he would be running for president in his home state of South Carolina. I don’t know whether this is just a political stunt or not, but a Colbert Candidacy on either a republican or a democratic ticket would be extremely interesting for the race.

A recent blog post on the NY Times’s website has an interesting quote that shows that republican’s generally don’t do humor well.

Katon Dawson, the chairman of the state Republican Party, said his office had also received a call from Mr. Colbert’s staff … Mr. Dawson, though was far more dismissive of Mr. Colbert’s apparent intentions than his Democratic counterparts. “My advice,’’ he said in a telephone interview, “is that he could probably have more fun buying a sports car and getting a girlfriend.’’

Clinton: Establishment V. Netrootz in Democratic Party Politics

Hillary Clinton’s Campaign for the nomination is going exceedingly well. She is referred two by almost every one as the front runner, She is back on top in the found raising category, and she is getting important endorsements from local party officials left and right. The web and liberal political enthusiasts on the other hand are in a bit of a different mindset backing both Obama, Edwards and of course Kucinich (who’s supporters are a little on the crazy side but very nice).
This split is perfectly understandable. Clinton embodies what the democratic establishment values most: She’s a Clinton, which means she has name recognition something they love. She’s a women, making here a “progressive” choice. She does well enough among black voters with whom her husband was immensely popular. She’s a Senator with a strong on giving bush more power record, meaning she’s not soft on terrorism. Clinton has it all in there eyes.
The Netroots on the other hand represents a group that was never happy with Bill Clinton’s term in office. More over, they are a livid at the lack of spine that the Democratic majority in Congress has shown in congress on key issues; particularly the war in Iraq, and fiscal policy. The rightly recognize that the path the majority has taken has jeopardized the new, and hard won majority. The net roots is also driven more to support outsiders, hence their choices in the democratic primary. This outsider attitude can also be seen in the Netroots of the Republican Party which has raised $5 million (USD) for Ron Paul.
When the election comes around the question will be will the Netroots be able to beat out the establishment? My answer here is no. While Clinton will face a large challenge she is the only candidate in the top three who is embraced fully by the Democratic establishment, while both Obama and Edwards split the Netroots. The Netroots did show its muscle last election, but it was most effective in promoting a-typical democrats against corrupt republicans, and less effective at forcing its candidates through against more moderate conservatives, and in conservative strong holds, so staunch right-wing neo-fascists lost in Pennsylvania, but Darcy Burner lost to Dave Riechart in Washington. The Netroots won’t be able to significantly affect the primaries, especially when they are split.
While Clinton doesn’t energize the faithful yet, she is able to significantly reach out to Middle America. While that reaching out to this group shouldn’t be a candidates main qualification, its understandable that the democratic establishment post-Bill Clinton craves that demographic.
Unfortunately Clinton’s campaign has shown an almost distain for the Netroots even while embracing their tactics and occasionally their rhetoric. I think this means that instead of adopting a ticket which is balanced (Clinton for the establishment, Obama or Edwards for the Netroots) Clinton will pull a Gore, and grab another boring establishment VP, such as Joe Biden, or Bill Richardson.
Unfortunately that thinking is so first decade. It’s still a valid strategy, but if things continue it won’t move the democrats very far past 2008. The sad fact is that the lack of social investment in the US has led to dedevelopment. This makes progressive values and programs more then right, it makes them necessary. More and more Americans are less well off. Bill Clinton’s post-Regan appeal as a conservative Democrat, isn’t as large as it once was. Soccer Mom’s aren’t just worried about education any more, health care, the environment, and roads, are becoming national issues. I don’t know if you realize this but when roads become a national election issue, you’re like on par with Bolivia.
Progressive values will become key for national leadership. Unfortunately if the bulk of the Democratic Party doesn’t change its tone, it risks becoming irrelevant. Or worse yet, it won’t become irrelevant and politics will continue to be more about pulling the wool over people eyes, and making ourselves outraged about ads in the NY Times. We really are at a cross roads, and what the Clinton Campaign chooses to do ultimately will determine whether American recovers, or whether our educated youth begin to leave.

Because everything is political - The Seattle Sonics

Billionaires are great. They set up charities create investment, buy really freakin' big houses, and try and move sports teams to their home city. Yes, I am talking about the Seattle Sonics and the Seattle Strom, and their new owner Clay Bennett and a group of Oklahoma Business men.

Today, they are being sued by a pair of Seattle Season Ticket holders for fraud. This case serves a as a good talking point about wealth, responsibility, and Stadiums. When Clay Bennette and his group bought the Sonics, and the Storm it was with the intention of moving them, or flipping the team. This is the source of his suit against the city of Seattle. He is costing the city thousands of dollars in attorney fees, just because he wants to move the team. Now, if he gets a new stadium like he wants, he'll sell the team and make a nice profit.

So, what are the options? Well you can sue, which has happened. Now there are other solutions as well. We can let the team move for instance, which no one really wants to do. Seattle loves the Sonics, they are one of the few teams in the area not to suffer fair-weather fans. Take my Mariners, please! Just don’t take my Sonics. Also, we have the domination machine known as the Storm. Now the Strom gets a good amount respect for a WNBA team, and they wouldn’t do as well in conservative Oklahoma, as they do out here in liberal Seattle. There are marketing reasons for this that I don’t really want to get into. We could spend hundreds of millions of dollars on building a new stadium. But that would make traffic worse, and who really wants that. Also it would put a drain on local businesses at a time when our economy is gangbusters. Plus, it would be in Everett or somewhere similarly crappy.

The solution I favor is buying the teams. Yes, the city of Seattle should own the Storm, and the Sonics. Why not? It would be more financially reasonable then say building a stadium we wouldn’t own or make money off of. There would be security for current fans, knowing the team definitely is leaving, which would increase ticket sales. Also there is the windfall that new fans would create. People not in favor of the Sonics, and the Strom would get behind them. I am not saying every one would, but the Northwest likes to buy local, and a local team, with local owners, might be enough to convince some skeptics to come to a few games, and maybe buy a baseball cap or something.

Buying a team also means that we won’t have to keep spending tons of money making major renovations every 10 years, and building new facilities every 25 years or so. Ultimately a locally owned team is the best solution. If Seattle doesn’t want to put its money where its mouth is it should let the teams leave, but we shouldn’t waste our money on another stadium.

This article was inspired by a peice in the Seattle Times. Linked here.