Veterans deserve better than party politics

Guest Perspective/Shawn Girard

A year ago today, my father passed away.

An uneducated, unskilled man who loved people, he complained about, but never lost faith in the country he had served with pride in the U.S. Navy. He was well liked, active in his community and in service to the disabled and elderly.

He died in a VA hospital, the same hospital system he had visited many times during the years of his declining health. There was a wonderful hospital a few miles from his home, but he had to ask friends and relatives to drive him, time and time again, an hour to Boston.

You see, elderly veterans in America who require care and are scraping by on a fixed and inadequate income cannot afford long-term treatment in a real hospital.

We didn’t know until a week before he died what was actually wrong with him. Years of treatment by different doctors investigated one problem after another, but never discovered the fatal lung disease which took his life. Overburdened case workers never had the time to advocate for better treatment.

I will never forget his last days: The empty corridors, darkened and unused spaces and unstaffed reception desks of a dingy hospital long past its prime. My terminally ill father waited in one of those empty halls for an hour, on a stretcher, outside over-crowded rooms. We searched in vain to locate someone, anyone, to take responsibility for his care. Our requests, and later, our days of phone calls led only to conflicting reports of his health and treatment, ever-shifting cycles of blame, voicemail or silence.

Later, among his belongings, we would find hundreds of pages of documents related to his health which he had requested. Perhaps he hoped to understand his illness or to be better equipped to communicate his problems to new specialists who seemed oblivious to his history. Maybe he was just hoping one of his friends or family members could help him write the correct person to expedite his case. We will never know. The documents arrived only a few days before his last hospitalization.

Four months later, when the story of the failures at Walter Reed Army Medical Center became news, I was disgusted. The inadequacies of our Veteran’s Health Care System were no secret to anyone in Washington and to have the liars come forward, the President and Congress alike, to speak out about the grave injustice done to those who have served us, was the height of hypocrisy and the final straw for me.

These men and women, who we trusted to represent us, had robbed our nation’s coffers for years, of the funds needed to support our veterans. They had stolen that money and funneled it to special interest projects in their states to shore up support for reelection and line the pockets of their large donors. Few among them were innocent of this abuse and none of them were ignorant.

Nearly a year later, the tragic story of the VA has passed into memory for most. General Weightman has been fired, Francis Harvey has stepped down, but nothing has changed. These men were not responsible for the failures of Walter Reed or the hospital in which my father died. When you go to the polls in 2008, I hope you will think about who was.

Whether we elect a Democrat or a Republican as president, whether we send one, or the other, to Congress, we all lose if we continue to support the system, and the parties, that lie to us with a smile and protect the liars from accountability and justice.

Right now, hundreds of soldiers are returning from abroad with life altering injuries, trauma and a promise from a nation to repay their bravery and patriotism with our support. This obligation will cost billions upon billions of dollars and will not be a priority for Washington except during election cycles, or times of crisis.

I do not pretend to understand fully the reasons for our current unconstitutionally waged war. If anyone besides the President and his close advisors claim to understand, they are fools or liars. What I do understand is the enormous cost and obligation we have undertaken on behalf of hundreds of thousands of military personnel and their families.

Their children, their grandchildren will inherit these obligations. It won’t be the multinational corporations, defense contractors or politicians who pay. I hope history judges the reward equal to the expense of our foolish war.

Shawn Girard is a Loudon resident running as an independent candidate for U.S. Senate in New Hampshire. For more information about his campaign, go to www.shawngirard.com.

Granny D on 'The View'

According to an email I received earlier this week [yeah, I'm just getting to about 200 emails I have to read], Granny D and the director of the documentary about her, "Run Granny Run," will be on "The View" tomorrow morning at 11 a.m.

National Popular Vote campaign visits Mass.

I don't know how I feel about this bill. I think I'm probably in the minority but I like and respect the Electoral College. I think, as the Founders thought, that it prevents mob rule from occurring. I think Rep. Murphy's line is hilarious: "... That means no Presidential advertising in the general election, and no campaigning here."
Eh, first, that's not altogether true. Al Gore and Joe Lieberman campaigned in Massachusetts in 2000, as did Ralph Nader. George Bush did in 1988 even though he had no chance of winning the state. So, Charlie is a bit off base there.
And who cares if people in Massachusetts don't see any presidential advertising? Most of it is bogus, although amusing. Voters are better off if they aren't bombarded by the advertising. But they can always see it on YouTube if they really want to.

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW SCHOLAR, PRESIDENT OF NATIONAL POPULAR VOTE CAMPAIGN, GOOD GOVERNMENT GROUPS URGE LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE TO ENACT A NATIONWIDE POPULAR VOTE FOR PRESIDENT.

BOSTON (Sept. 19, 2007) - At a State House hearing today lawmakers considered a reform that would dramatically change the way we elect the President of the United States.
The National Popular Vote bill would guarantee that the presidential candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states and the District of Columbia will win the Presidency, rather than the current winner-take all in all states but Maine and Nebraska.
"The current system is arbitrary, accident-prone, and increasingly untenable," said Jamie Raskin, professor of Constitutional Law at American University and the State Senator from Maryland who successfully shepherded the same bill thought the Maryland state legislature. "It is time for the American people to elect the president the way we elect governors, senators, and every other office in the country: everyone acting together, without games and subterfuge."
"Massachusetts is like the vast majority of states-spectators in the Presidential race," said Charley Murphy (D-Burlington), one of the lead sponsors. "The outcome here, and in 3/4 of the states, is not in doubt. That means no Presidential advertising in the general election, and no campaigning here. We want to make all votes equal- regardless of whether a voter lives in Massachusetts or in Ohio or in Florida."
The National Popular Vote legislation, if enacted, would not become effective immediately. Only when states with 270 Presidential electors, a majority in the electoral college, and roughly half of the U.S. population, have passed identical legislation would it be implemented. Proponents are aiming for it to take full effect for the 2012 Presidential election.
The National Popular Vote bill has been signed into law in Maryland passed both chambers in Illinois and is expected to become law there later this fall there. It was also enacted by the California and Hawaii legislatures, but vetoed by their governors, and may still become law this year in New Jersey. The bill has 350 cosponsors across the country.
"The National Popular Vote Campaign is taking off," said Barry Fadem, President of the non-partisan non-profit steering the campaign. "We have had a excellent response around the country. Voters dislike the current system. It doesn't make sense to them. What they want is two very basic things; first, that the candidate with the most votes wins. Second, they want to see their vote and how it affects the outcome of the election. The current system does neither."
Fadem cited on-going public opinion research by Gallop that has shown over 70% of the public wants a popular vote. This research he says has been conducted every year for over 50 years.
Civil rights and good government groups, including MASSPIRG, MassVOTE, Common Cause, the NAACP, and the Black Political Task Force, said that the reform would dramatically increased voter participation and would be more democratic than the current system.
"Enacting this legislation will do more than any other reform to increase voter participation in Presidential elections," said Pam Wilmot Common Cause Massachusetts executive director. "The vast majority of votes just don't count under the current system."
"All votes counting and counting equally, what a concept," added Roscoe Morris of the New England Area conference of the NAACP. "It's about time."
The Massachusetts National Popular Vote legislation (H. 678, H. 710, S. 445, and Senate 452) has been filed by Representative Charley Murphy, Rep. Martin Walsh, Rep. Lewis Evangelidis, Senator Joan Menard, and Senator Robert Creedon along with 25 other cosponsors.

Morse returns to airwaves too ... on WEIM

Author and conservative pundit Chuck Morse will not be on WBIX 1060 after all. He has actually just started a new afternoon drive program on WEIM 1280, The Blend.
Chuck's new show, entitled "Two-Way Talk," will air weekdays from 5 to 7 p.m. According to a post on his Web site, "The program will focus on breaking news, pop culture, health, and money." The station isn't streaming currently but the Web site suggests it will be soon: ["WEIM AM 1280 The Blend"].
WEIM is based out of Fitchburg, Mass. and runs at 5,000 watts during the day and drops to 1,000 watts at night. The daytime signal runs from Worcester to Framingham to Lowell up to Nashua and then back around, in a circle, through the boonies south of Keene.
It will be interesting to hear what Chuck does with this show. He has been on six or seven area stations at this point, with not a lot of longevity. Over the years, I have found his shows to a mixed bag, both interesting and not. But if you've ever had to book a radio program, you know that it is difficult to hit a home run for every show. I will check it out on my drive home and report back about it at a later date.

NHPR
Here is a "fun" radio fact from NHPR's "Extra" email:

Did you know that it costs NHPR $162 for every hour of Morning Edition and All Things Considered every day of the year? That's $345,968 a year. It costs even more to produce local programming.

I'm kinda shocked by this. With $350,000, I could easily create 10 hours worth of New Hampshire-based daily programming which would be on par with NHPR's current programming. In fact, when I was running another local radio station, we were able to create more than 12 hours a day of localized programming for less than $200k annually and we won almost as many broadcasting awards as NHPR and more broadcasting awards than any other commercial radio station in New Hampshire during the time period! Had we entered all the same contests as NHPR, who knows how many more awards we would have won.
You know, I could go on a total blistering rant here but I will keep it to the finer points. I honestly do enjoy a lot of NHPR's weekend programming. I also think Xenia Piaseckyj, the afternoon news reader, is a top notch broadcaster and decent person. I also have other acquaintances who work at the network.
But, at the same time, I'm so disappointed in them and there is a good chance that I will never give them another dime again. For $350k - or even the $3 million budget they have - NHPR should easily be producing a lot more in-house content which would be more relevant to the listeners of New Hampshire then they currently are producing. It can be done ... I've proven it can be done on the local level, with one dinky AM radio station and a fraction of the resources. You just have to have the wherewithal to do it.

Arnie's back on the air
Arnie Arnesen is back on the radio down at Lawrence's WCCM 1110 AM from 6 to 9 a.m.: ["ARNIE"]. The signal runs from Lawrence to Lowell up to Nashua up to Manch and then down to Salem in a funny, slanted snow cone-like shape. It has taken awhile for her to get back on the air. Here's hoping she lasts a bit longer than previous gigs. I will check out the show on my way into work and see if it is worth listening to on a regular basis.

GOP, out of the gate: Obstructionists
Guest Perspective/State Sen. Peter Burling

You don’t have to look hard to see Republican Statehouse leaders, in their new minority role, attacking majority efforts to pass responsible laws. Senate Minority Leader Ted Gatsas has poured out a small river of disparaging misinformation about a number of bills regarding health insurance for dependents, civil unions for same gender couples, and even a plan to lower acceptable lead levels in the blood of New Hampshire’s children. The venom continues about the budget, the first honest and comprehensive budget in years. Such criticism is expected regarding partisan issues and is treated with the appropriate skepticism.

What falls out of tradition is this week’s effort by the Republican minority to take advantage of a clerical error. On Sept. 5, the minority caucus refused to cooperate to fix a simple mistake in the legislative process. By obstructing our efforts to correct an inaccuracy, they have set the state on what will be an expensive and chaotic path towards the premature implementation of a bill. The facts are as follows:

The Senate passed a bill raising the compulsory age for school attendance from 16 to 18, to which the House agreed. The effective date in the original bill was set for 2009 so that school districts have time to arrange alternative programs for students who do not excel in regular classrooms.

Another bill, dealing with a different subject, also passed in both chambers. Due to a clerical error in the drafting process, this other bill appeared to change the effective date of the school age bill.

Such mistakes are not abnormal. In fact, each previous year in memory, at least one similar mistake has been are made. The difference is, in the past, the Democrats always helped to fix the problem by supporting a vote to clarify legislative intent. Unfortunately, on Sept. 5, Republican leadership refused to cooperate by acknowledging the clear legislative intent of the bill and voted to leave the error on the books.

Well, so what? The “so what” is this: the 17 senators who originally voted for the school age bill with a 2009 effective date have been denied the power of their votes. Early implementation of the bill will make it harder for good people to make a good law work. This will only cost our school districts additional money and aggravation. Perhaps worse, an important legislative tradition that we fight over policy but unite for the sake of good process, has been diminished.

One can only wonder why Republicans are putting political posturing ahead of their school districts.

State Sen. Peter Burling is a Democrat from Cornish.

Canceled elections
I want to offer some quick comments and links and then get back to some other stuff.
First, another city cancels an election: ["Patrick allows city to waive preliminary election"]. I don't really know if it is such a good idea to make a habit of this. Surely, the 5th Congressional District race could have been lined up to be held on the preliminary election for Lowell, since Marty Meehan left plenty of time after his resignation to hold a special election. I'm surprised Secretary of State Bill Galvin didn't line it up to jibe with elections already being held in some cities, like Lowell and Lawrence. Then, it would not have needed to have been canceled.
Speaking of canceling elections, here is a preview in the Phoenix of the Boston City Council race: ["The rumor mill"] . Note the bit about the potential sixth place finishers. Some folks are always a day late and a dollar short.

The earth
Two stories about the planet worth looking at. First, this one, about a monstrous asteroid which could come very close to hitting the planet in 29 years: ["Civilization Threatening Asteroid Now Viewed by NASA, Others"]. and this one, about the earth's axis being off: ["Earth's Axis Tilts"]. Could this be the cause of "global warming" and not humans? It would make sense.

R.I.P. Hilly Kristal
The guy who opened CBGB's which pretty much created the alternative music phenomenon died recently: ["Hilly Kristal; His CBGB Nurtured N.Y. Punk Scene"]. I never met the man but would often walk by him at the club when I would go to shows. He would be up on a stoop, chain-smoking, and looking down at everyone.

TWA 800
I've always wondered about this one, considering what has been going on in this country over the last 15 years. But now, there is more evidence available and it's beginning to look like this was a terrorist attack: ["TWA 800 FOIA Suit Yields Smoking Gun"].

Preview
The NAB Radio Show is happening in a few weeks. I won't be going this year, even though it is in North Carolina and not that far away. But here is the site: ["NAB Radio Show"].

We Need Candidates With Good Judgment

Guest Perspective/Lee H. Hamilton

All over the country, political candidates, consultants, reporters, campaign volunteers, and politically active citizens are pondering a single question: What do voters want in a candidate? Will voters be motivated in next year's elections by issues, personalities! or some intangible mix of qualities in the candidates they're considering?

Every voter makes up his or her mind differently, of course, but my suspicion has always been that most voters weigh a mix of considerations; the true "single-issue voter" is rare. To be sure, they want to know candidates' stands on the issues they care about - how they articulate them and what they consider most important. They also want to get a sense of the candidates' overall vision and where they want to take us as a nation, how they see the role of the federal government at home and whether they propose a muscular or more restrained foreign policy.

They look for less tangible things as well, qualities that would make them comfortable with a candidate. Voters generally want a sense that a candidate knows why he or she is running for office - and in particular, that it has to do with a desire to accomplish goals or to improve the common good, rather than simply to slake some person! al ambition.

Voters also want to feel good about a candidate's values, intelligence, and sensitivity to their concerns. This is why candidates who are masters of statistics and dense policy arguments sometimes leave voters cold, while candidates who can present a compelling "story" attract attention and support.

Over the years, poll after poll has suggested that voters put "integrity" and personal honesty at the top of their requirements in a candidate. My sense is that other concerns come higher. If voters like what a politician stands for or find some deeper personal connection, they can forgive a lot: Witness the re-election of Richard Nixon in 1972 or the high poll numbers Bill Clinton enjoyed despite questions about his personal conduct.

One such consideration, generally dismissed by pundits but clearly embraced by voters, is simple likability. Americans want to feel at ease with the person they're voting for. And while they won't admit it, at least not to pollsters, they take physical attractiveness into account, as ! a string of handsome presidents in the television age - John F. Kennedy, Ronald Reagan, both Bushes, Bill Clinton - suggests.

But I have always thought that perhaps the most important trait in a political leader is invisible, or at least difficult to discern ahead of time: sound judgment. It often gets confused for intelligence, but intelligent people can misjudge affairs if they're led astray by ideology, dogmatic thinking, or even good intentions.

On the other hand, you can often tell if candidates lack good judgment: If they are unable to be wary of their own passions, inclined to dismiss other views, unsuspecting of the information they receive, or unwilling to admit that their views might be wrong, then it's a good bet they will mishandle people, events and the difficult situations that confront our nation regularly.

A great deal is at stake in this regard. Historians note, for instance, that while George Washington was neither a good speaker nor a! scintillating intellect, he possessed very good judgment about people and events. The course of our nation's history would surely have been different had he been otherwise.

Good political judgment calls for a keen sense of what will work and what won't in a given set of circumstances, and what the best means might be to achieve policy goals - in essence, it requires that leaders see the world as it is, not as they would like it to be. It demands great insight into others: who is competent and who is not, who will speak the truth to them and who will not, whom to believe and whom not to believe, who will persevere and who will fold.

It demands equally keen insight into complex situations and events, and an ability to discern possibilities for progress that others might miss. Finally, it requires a keen sense of what can be accomplished given the personalities and events in play: when to compromise, when to yield, and when to stand firm.

It is probably expecting too much that voters will be able to see all this as they go ! about choosing whom to vote for. But we can certainly hope they will try.

Lee Hamilton is Director of the Center on Congress at Indiana University. He was a member of the U.S. House of Representatives for 34 years.

R.I.P. Aaron Russo
About 30 minutes ago, I received an email stating that Aaron Russo, the film producer ["Trading Places," "The Rose"] and Libertarian presidential candidate, has passed away. I don't know if this is legit or not although I know he was sick. I still haven't watched "From Freedom to Fascism," although I bought it on DVD quite awhile ago. I guess it might be time to watch it now.

Update: Russo died of cancer: ["Aaron Russo dies of cancer"]. Those wishing to offer a card or donation to help offset medical expenses can do so here:

All Your Freedoms, Inc.
P.O. Box #1213
264 South La Cienega Blvd.
Beverly Hills, California 90211

Ten Suggestions for Karl Rove
Guest Perspective/Raymond Buckley

In what seems to be another strange turn of events in Bush’s White House, Karl Rove is leaving. I think we all thought he would fight until the bitter end, considering he did not leave after or during any number of scandals that had his name written all over them. Rove should hear this message loud and clear: It is too late. Leaving now will not make us forget, nor will it make us forgive, the indefensible assault on honest and transparent government that you masterminded. The President, however much a puppet of Rove he is, should ultimately be held responsible for including such a reduced person on his team for so many years.
Here are a few ways Karl Rove could fill his newly found free time:

* Spend a day with the family of every soldier lost in Iraq and explain why Bush misled us into the war.
* Volunteer at a VA hospital and give our veterans a reason why they are not receiving the best healthcare possible.
* Write a hand written letter of apology to the tens of thousands of African Americans in Florida whose names were struck from the voting rolls just before the 2000 election.
* Tell the truth to the people of New Hampshire about your role in the 2002 phone jamming scandal.
* Enlighten Americans why you thought it was honorable to stand behind your corrupt friends Tom DeLay, Scooter Libby and Jack Abramoff.
* Visit every law school in the country and describe why you, Bush, Cheney, Gonzalez and the rest of the Administration think you are above the law.
* Spend a month living with a working family and tell them why you oppose labor unions that would provide them better wages and increased healthcare access.
* Volunteer in the Gulf Coast and assist the families still ravaged by Bush’s indifference to the Hurricane Katrina crisis.
* Spend a month in witness protection so you know how scared Valerie Plame and her family were after you broke her CIA cover for political retribution.
* Testify on Capitol Hill, as you were subpoenaed to do, so Congress can perform oversight on the Bush political operation.

Ray Buckley is chairman of the New Hampshire Democratic Party.

Did Hagel win Monday's Dem debate?

The Draft Hagel folks think so:

News Release

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

The Winner of Monday Night’s Democratic Debate: Republican Senator Chuck Hagel

Boston, MA – At the first CNN/YouTube Democratic Presidential Debate held Monday, July 24, Democratic contender Senator Joseph Biden (D-DE) was asked by a questioner: “If you had to pick any Republican member of Congress or Republican governor to be your running mate, who would it be? Without hesitation, Mr. Biden said: Chuck Hagel. When asked the same question, Democratic contender John Edwards (D-NC) said Chuck Hagel as well. Senator Chuck Hagel’s name continues to be batted around Washington political circles as a possible Republican, Independent, and now Democratic candidate for the ’08 election.
In a political environment immersed in hyper-partisanship and ideological polarization, one where political gamesmanship has become the watchword of the day in Washington, Senator Chuck Hagel (R-Nebraska) has managed to transcend partisan lines and earn respect across the isle.
In his own party, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) calls Senator Hagel a “solid, thoughtful, conservative Republican” whose voice is invaluable to the nation, and who is “an indispensable member of the Republican team.” (Lincoln Star Journal, May 18, 2007, by Don Walton, “McConnell says Hagel's Iraq warnings were right”)
Hagel is expected to decide whether to pursue a presidential bid in the next few weeks. For the sake of unifying this nation with true leadership, the “www.drafthagel08.com” movement continues to ask Mr. Hagel to enter the presidential sweepstakes. We are confident that, as president, Hagel can forge a bipartisan consensus to tackle critically important issues which have been mired in partisanship. These issues include extricating the United States from Iraq, immigration reform, and returning fiscal sanity to our nation.
Hagel is an accomplished mainstream independent-minded conservative voice that emphasizes realist internationalism abroad and fiscal austerity at home in the spirit of former Presidents Dwight D. Eisenhower and Gerald R. Ford, and former Secretaries of State James Baker and Colin Powell.
Senator Hagel, a member of the Foreign Relations Committee, maintains that the only way to end the bloodshed in Iraq is through a political accommodation. A Vietnam Veteran, Senator Hagel has called our misadventure in Iraq “the most dangerous foreign policy blunder in this country since Vietnam.” To bring the political solution to fruition, Senator Hagel supports establishing an international mediator with the “backing and authority of the international community to engage Iraq’s political, religious, ethnic, and tribal leaders in an inclusive political process.” (Financial Times, July 3, 2007, by Chuck Hagel, “Internationalize Iraq”). Senator Hagel’s position on the Iraq War is in sharp contrast to the major Republican Primary candidates who continue to support the failed policies of the Bush Administration.
Senator Hagel has shown his fiscal conservative stripes by breaking with his Party and by opposing the fiscally irresponsible prescription-drug program under Medicare. In addition, Senator Hagel is a steadfast supporter of states rights, vehemently opposing the President’s federal “No Child Left Behind Act.” What’s more, Senator Hagel opposes the President’s call for a Constitutional amendment codifying marriage, emphatically stating: “I don't think the federal government has any business in dictating what constitutes a marriage.”
It is for these reasons that we consider Senator Chuck Hagel to be the best candidate to reclaim the leadership of the mainstream of this country. We believe Hagel’s message will strike a resonant chord across the “great political divide.” We would be glad to speak with you at-length about the “Draft Hagel 08” Movement. For more information, please contact us.

Rich Rubino, Press Spokesperson, 781-990-1477
rich.rubino@drafthagel08.com
www.drafthagel08.com
Draft HAGEL 08 is not authorized by or associated with any candidate, candidate's committee, PAC, or political party.

The GOP: 'Grand Obstructionist Party'
Republicans Continue to Block Will of the People on Just About Everything

Guest Perspective/Ray Buckley

It is sad and shameful times as Republicans are dragging their feet, holding up the legislative process, and standing in the way of progress on the issues most important to the people of New Hampshire and across this great nation. Sens. Judd Gregg and John E. Sununu continue to put their loyalty to the President and their political party ahead of the interests of the Granite State and our brave men and women in uniform. It is not surprising that in the latest polls, 66 percent of independent voters say they will vote in the Democratic primary. This dramatic shift is because Independents in New Hampshire strongly oppose the Iraq War and are pleased at how Reps. Carol Shea-Porter and Paul Hodes are fighting to bring our troops home. The landslide re-election by Gov. John Lynch and historic victories by Democrats strongly indicates that Independents are realizing more and more which Party is fighting for them and which Party is more interested in standing in the way of progress. The UNH poll is a striking reminder of how the largest bloc of New Hampshire voters - Independents - continue to sway toward the Democrats during this decade. If Republicans stick to their obstructionist ways in Concord and Washington, we look forward to welcoming them into the Democratic Party, permanently.
In their first six months in office, Reps. Shea-Porter and Hodes have been keeping their promise to New Hampshire’s voters by working to change course in Iraq. Every step of the way, Republicans like Sununu, have shown that they lack the leadership and backbone to stand up to the President. Just one day after a new National Intelligence Estimate provided additional evidence that Republicans have failed to make our homeland safe and allowed Al Qaeda to rebuild, Sununu chose to protect George W. Bush and his disastrous Iraq policy by voting against an amendment that would have begun a rollback of U.S. forces within four months and redefined the U.S. mission in Iraq.
Earlier this week Gregg attacked New Hampshire’s Congressmen for being partisan and standing with the Democratic majority in their effort to win this war. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. Bush has fed the American public one war rationale after another and passive Republicans, like Sununu, have stood by and watched while one lousy policy failure after another has been recommended. It isn't good enough anymore to say, '’Well, I supported some other amendment that didn't have a timetable, that didn't bring the troops home.”
Sununu not only tows the Party line by supporting failed policies in Iraq, he is in lock-step with Republicans down in Washington on just about everything. Recently, Sununu voted against expanding stem cell research and the Employee Free Choice Act, which would protect workers' right to organize without fear of harassment or intimidation. Sununu has made it clear that he stands with the president, and not the people of New Hampshire.
I’m not the only one questioning Gregg and Sununu’s continued participation in the GOP “Grand Obstructionist Party.” The Portsmouth Herald ["Troop deadline is bit of sanity for Iraq war," July 19] called into question the logic behind their continued support for the current war policy - “‘logic, as best as we can reckon, that says if you think things are bad now, the Democrats' plan for major troop withdrawals will make things even worse. Instead of political posturing, Congress should focus on getting the policy right.’ Striving to get ‘the policy right’ is a remarkable admission well into the fifth year of war and occupation. Political posturing is a matter of perspective, but it's legitimate to ask what Sununu and Gregg - or Maine Sens. Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins - have been doing all this time to get the policy right.”
Republicans in Washington will be held accountable for their obstructionism when they face the voters in 2008. Sununu will be forced to make a decision whether he is going to answer New Hampshire’s call to end this war or if he will continue to protect Bush and blindly follow these failed Iraq policies. Every obstructionist step of the way John E. will continue to alienate Independents and prove to voters that the only way to responsibly bring this war to an end and begin to repair America’s reputation here and abroad is to elect Democrats in 2008.
Ray Buckley is the chairman of the New Hampshire Democratic Party.

Why I'm voting for Irena Goddard on June 5

Note to readers: This is a letter to the editor I sent earlier this week to the Concord Monitor which hasn't been published yet.

Special elections, especially ones held in summer months, tend to be sleepy occasions. The race to replace the late-Marjory Swope as councilor of Ward 5 has been no exception. On Tuesday, June 5, voters will have the choice between two interesting candidates, with appealing and varied backgrounds. However, one candidate has shown the capacity to not only think about issues more deeply but also come up with creative solutions to solve problems. That candidate is Irena Goddard.

The voters of Ward 5 may think they are too busy to vote in this special election but I urge them not to ignore this race. It is the local elections – not the national ones – which have the most bearing on our lives, making sure we have municipal services and guaranteeing that the immediate things around us get done.

And as we all know, our city is facing some pretty difficult times. The budget is a mess. Social service agencies are finding it hard to cover things with less and less money. The police department is understaffed, with patrolmen being taken off their routes at night to do detective work, something I find completely unacceptable. Our first responders, like firefighters and EMTs, are falling behind on training. Heroin is cheap and easily accessible and has become the drug of choice. Some of us who have lived in bigger cities have lost friends to heroin and it is a shock to think that it is so casually being used by our young people in Concord. Anyone with their eyes open can see that while we have a great city, in many ways, it is headed in the wrong direction and someone needs to do something about it. It is clearly time to get resourceful and think about things differently than we are.

Over the last two years, I have gotten to know Irena and her adorable son. She thinks outside the box and will use her diverse business and life experience to thoughtfully tackle problems. As well, I think we can all agree, that the council could use more moms serving on it. If elected, I know Irena will show the leadership our city needs right now, by putting our neighborhoods above politics and doing what is best for everyone.

For almost a century, my family has lived in this community. I was born and raised in Concord myself, living most of that time in Ward 5, and I can tell you that there is no better person to be representing us than Irena Goddard. Please join me in casting a vote for Irena on Tuesday.

Update
The Monitor printed my letter in the Sunday edition, a big plus, along with another letter for Irena and one for her opponent. Tracking the letters to the editor in the Monitor, that makes five for Irena and two for her opponent. Hopefully, that is how Election Day will be.

DON'T March on Washington, They're Home! Camp out on Congressmen's Front Lawns
A Memorial Day Prayer
Guest Perspective/Ralph Lopez

I'm writing this, like many of us, harboring disgust; disgust at the Democratic leadership of course, disgust at the MoveOn people for backing the initial compromise that led to this cave-in, disgust at our own helplessness in forcing our congressmen to act like a real opposition to end, in Studs Terkel's words, this "incredibly obscene war." Which every day is earning us more hatred and taking resources from the task at hand in Afghanistan, and northern Pakistan.

A part of me is even mad at the guys who, after March 2003, signed up for getting themselves killed. Naive enough to believe a filthy liar like George W. Bush when he said Iraq was somehow related to 9/11, and we had to take the fight to the enemy. Bush, who let bin Laden escape at Tora Bora when he could have killed him, so bin Laden could kill another day. Whose Vice President Dick Cheney, did business with Saddam president as recently as 1998, through Halliburton.

I'm tired of getting teary when I read about another of their funerals, their mothers screaming or collapsing as my mother would have, had she had to bury me before my life ever really began. How evil this all is. Then I think: What if I had been held, as a matter of life or death, to all the decisions I made when I was 20 or 21? I'd be in real trouble. The fact remains: These are my American brothers, and I love them and don't want any more of them to die in Iraq.

The Democrats' excuse is they don't have a veto-proof majority. But it doesn't take a veto-proof majority to start the investigation of the 360 tons of lost high explosives in Iraq back in 2004 that are still killing the troops today.

An investigation that would weaken Bush's political position so much he would have to be the one to compromise. It's disgusting to see the Democrats weak and cowed by threats that they could be accused of "not supporting the troops." It makes you wonder what the NSA has found on these guys. That they resist kicking and screaming from going into the battle. I'm dead serious. Bush must have the mistress and male prostitute tapes on these congressmen all wrapped up, for them to let him sneer and preen and strut like a man who holds all the cards.

The press keeps saying there was "a bruising struggle" over the Iraq veto fight. Are you kidding me? They didn't even break a sweat.

Congress is home for the week beginning now until June 4. It's important to not give them a moment's peace, and at the same time to give them a clear idea of what we expect. Once again, a page from the Republican playbook.

When they came after Clinton from minority standing they hammered and hammered at many variations of thong underwear, until his position was so weak he couldn't proceed with his admittedly modest, centrist agenda. That's how you play, when you play to win. Three hundred and sixty tons of HMX high explosives, one pound of which can turn over a tank, is considerably more serious than thong underwear.

This constant reminder of incompetence or worse would cut the Republicans off at the knees when they try accusations of not supporting the troops. Not securing the HMX, which the administration knew of, and generals were begging him to secure, was like "invading the US for [weapons of mass destruction] and not securing Los Alamos Laboratory" in the words of Gary Milhollin, director of the Wisconsin Project.

Someone has to camp out on each of these congressmen's front lawns. If they throw you off, the sidewalk is public property. But remember, print out "The Democratic Offensive That Wasn't") and hand it to everyone you see, even the cops. Ralph Nader said we must perfect the art of "buttonholing" them, must another page from the Right Wing. Whether they are in church, at a picnic, trying to have a cup of coffee, anywhere, hand them the print-out, so they can't play dumb, and tell them THIS is what you expect. We did their work for them.

All they have to do is follow the plan. If not, start a search committee for who's going to run against them in the primary, even if it's years away. Start watching who they show up with in restaurants in D.C. Maybe that's the mistress.

Why bother? Because you are paying them. If your cellphone company sold you a lemon and you were stuck, wouldn't you go and scream at whomever sold it to you? Just because it was the right thing to do and they deserved it? Do you like the tax bite that comes out of your pay every week? Because that's the money that pays these guys to represent you.

Freedom isn't free. If we think it's time-consuming to give these guys a week of hell, next week, as we are all barely making ends meet, remember that Fort Ticonderoga was held in freezing winters by Americans whom, for footwear, had their feet wrapped up in rags. Put that in your pipe and smoke it. Who is the first to start "Camp Casey, MyTown, USA"?

In last week's Annapolis speech Bush again beat the horse to death that there are 'still people who want to attack us, who want to harm us.' Um, we know that, George. But you DAMNED well ain't protecting us. You're making it worse.

If, by the more than 3,400 American deaths in Iraq, we have been shaken to the core from the post-9/11 fear paralysis which caused us to blindly follow anyone who promised safety, in the process overturning the Constitution, and if, through this, the politics of pure fear are uprooted, the Constitution saved, and the constitutional republic restored, then those deaths were not in vain, and the gift, in life's strange way, is that which they were fighting for in the first place.

Ralph Lopez is a former state Rep. and state Senate candidate from Cambridge, Mass. and author of "American Dream." He also writes his own blog, Ralph Lopez World.

Two eye Concord Ward 5 Council seat

According to Concord City Clerk Janice Bonenfant, two candidates have emerged to run for the council seat held by the late Councilor Marjory Swope, who recently passed away due to cancer.
Irena Goddard of Redington Road and Robert Werner of the Hooksett Turnpike, are running. Other potential candidates have until 5 p.m. today to file to run.
Goddard, a Free State Project supporter, ran for Concord School Board last year, coming in fourth and missing a win by a mere 357 votes [Six candidates were vying for three seats]. Goddard placed fifth in Ward 5. Interestingly though, she placed second in Wards 8 and 9, the area on the southeastern side of the city, and the Heights. Both are on the opposite side of the city.
The school board race was lightly covered by the media. The Concord Monitor limited its coverage to printing a voter's guide and a political hit piece about incumbent Paul Codington losing his law license. The piece was published on the front page, above the fold, election morning, and surely had a role in his loss [Codington, through some court finagling, was later able to get his law license back]. A local radio station also hosted and broadcast one of the debates and produced news segments about each of the candidates running up to the election.
Werner was previously the vice chairman of the Merrimack County Democrats and a local powerbroker. He was a supporter of presidential candidate John Edwards in 2004 and also a policy analyst for the Smoke-Free NH Alliance, according to campaign finance reporting Web sites.
In September 2005, Werner created a PAC, Citizens for New Solutions. In May 2006, the PAC name was changed to Citizens for Sensible Solutions. An active Web site for the PAC was not found and the PAC does not appear to have done much during its existence.
In September 2006, the Cheshire County Democrats blog posted an event listing sponsored by the group: A complimentary reception and discussion about how Democrats can win in New Hampshire, featuring William Gaston and Elaine Kamarck, authors of "The Politics of Polarization," was held on Oct. 19 at the Manch hotspot, Fratello's. The blog described the PAC this way:

Citizens for Sensible Solutions advocates for public policies that expand economic and educational opportunity, strengthen families, promote community values, demand responsibility and accountability from government, and protects our citizens. CNS will actively support candidates for public office that embrace this positive vision of New Hampshire’s future.

In end of the year 2006 filing, according to the Secretary of State's office, the PAC raised $3,160 and spent $2,279. Werner donated $1,350 to the PAC. Other political players donating money include Billy Shaheen, the husband of the former Governor [$300], failed District 1 Congressional candidate and Attorney Jim Craig [$300], Attorney George Bruno [$100], and Attorney Mike Atkins [$100]. Fire PAC NH also donated $500 to the PAC. The PAC listed the Fratello's event [$1,465.95], an airline reimbursement, and postage of $646, as expenses for the year, leaving $880 on hand.
Last January, Concord Mayor Mike Donovan, appointed Werner to the Utility Policies/Appeal Board.
Ward 5 is located in the western part of Concord. It runs from the Green Street Community Center to the Hopkinton line west, north to Auburn Street, Little Pond Road, and Lake View Drive [not including White Park], and south to Little Turkey/Great Turkey Pond/River basin to the Bow line on one side and along Clinton Street on the other side.

Is Sen. Gregg the one?
Some folks out there in the blogosphere have been wondering who in the United States Senate is holding up some simple sunshine law legislation forwarded by Sen. Russ Feingold and co-sponsored by 31 other senators. The law, entitled The Senate Campaign Disclosure Parity Act, seeks to amend the campaign finance law to require Senate candidates to file election-related designations, statements, and reports in electronic form. It would also require the Secretary of the Senate to forward a copy of any electronically filed information to the Federal Election Commission within one working day instead of two working days. Not huge thing, you would think.
Well, it has been anonymously held up in the Senate but no one knows who is doing it: ["Clueless in the Senate"].
That is where the Sunshine Foundation comes in. They have been calling all the Senators trying to find out who is holding up this simple update to the campaign finance reform legislation. Well, the only one who won't answer Yea or Nay, is Sen. Judd Gregg, one of New Hampshire's senators: ["Sunlight Foundation"]. So, either all the other senators are lying when denying they are holding up the legislation, a possibility, or Gregg is indeed the culprit.
One has to wonder why this is happening, especially if Gregg is actually involved in holding up the change. He isn't up for reelection until 2010 which is a lifetime away, even with the changing demographics of the state. Is there really something so offensive in the legislation that it must be held up by Gregg?
Gregg is pretty popular in the state but something like this could backfire on him even though it will probably be forgotten by 2010. One could say that Gregg has lived a pretty charmed life. He is a political legacy here. His father was once a Governor. He has served as a Representative to Congress for four terms and later, Governor himself, for two terms. In 1992, Gregg decided not to run for reelection and instead, ran for Senate. He easily won the Republican primary and faced off against Democrat John Rauh, along with four independents. Rauh's refused PAC money and limited his contributions to $100, so he was underfunded in the general election. Gregg won, although with only 48 percent of the vote, not a majority. In 2004, Granny D challenged Gregg after one of Burt Cohen's campaign underlings allegedly drained a campaign account of cash. Gregg spent $2.5 million and Granny D spent $177,000. Gregg won with 66 percent. In 1998, another underfunded Democrat, George Condodemetraky challenged Gregg and lost, with only 28 percent of the vote, spending about $26,000 in the effort, compared to Gregg's $1.1 million-plus.
In 2005, Gregg won a secondary Powerball prize, which garnered some headlines. I think he was criticized for not donating the money and then later did donate to charity or part of it, I don't recall exactly. Gregg's wife was also involved in a kidnapping incident but was OK after the tragic event.
So, why is Gregg holding up this thing? Is he covering for others who don't want the change, assuming he is safe in the Senate? With so many Republicans supporting the legislation, what is the problem? Is it too difficult to do the people's business electronically?

Update: A representative for Sen. Gregg has denied that he is the anonymous Senator.

Massachusetts to lose a Congressional seat?

According to a recent study, population shifts and Hurricane Katrina, could change Congressional districts around the country: ["PDF"].
New Hampshire would need another 376,000 people moving into the state in order to gain a third Congressional seat and that isn't going to happen any time soon, never mind by 2010. But also included in the study is the potential loss of one seat in Massachusetts. This is very interesting and could create a total free for all in that state before 2010.
While it is only a few years away, I don't see any of the current representatives giving up their seats any time soon. They are essentially representatives for life. Throw in the fact that the Democrats will soon be in control of the Congress and it's a given that none of them will want to leave - never mind be shoved out. This means that if the data is true, there will have to be a primary between two of the existing incumbents sometime around 2012.
I don't have any of the specific data readily available at the moment as far as precinct by precinct populations. This is needed in order to really get creative. But let's do a little speculating here just for the fun of it.

Redistricting
There is a good chance the entire state would have to be redistricted. This would be a good thing for everyone involved. Let's start with the western part of the state and work our way east.
I don't suspect that the 1st District, currently represented by John Olver, will get any bigger than it is. In area, it is practically 40 percent of the state. It is too big for one person to represent, IMHO. Granted, redistricting Congressional districts has nothing to do with area. It is all about population. But the way the map looks now, the guy has too much turf.
There could be changes though to the 1st and 2nd District, represented by Richard Neal, which could create smaller area districts in the most western part of the state, one on top of the other, almost like pancakes. In this kind of scheme, the 1st would push forward into the 5th District's territory - currently represented by Marty Meehan - with the 2nd pushing into the 3rd District - currently represented by Jim McGovern. A new 3rd could be created from the western part of that district - essentially Worcester - and some parts east - running into the 5th and 7th, which is currently represented by Ed Markey.
The second part which could be accomplished is a revamping of the middle districts of the state. The middle state districts - especially the 4th, which is currently represented by Barney Frank - are gerrymandered jokes. The 4th squiggles around like a dancing snake from a basket. It is bizarre to say the least. The 3rd, 9th and 10th also have little consistency to them. The 3rd runs from Swansea, up the side of Rhode Island, to Worcester, in almost a quill pen shape. The 4th runs from Buzzards Bay all the way up to Newton and Brookline, almost like a deformed claw. The bulk of the 9th, currently represented by Stephen Lynch, isn't so bad especially in the middle cluster. It just goes all the way up through Southie and into the North End! The 10th also isn't too bad when you consider that it includes all of the Cape and most of the seashore south of Boston. But it is odd shaped running from Quincy on down. Bill Delahunt represents the area and "lives" in Quincy. Hence the odd shape.
The creation of these districts were based on two factors - one relevant; one not: The standard districting population numbers and where the incumbent representative lived in 2002. But where a current elected official lives should have nothing to do with the process of redistricting. This was something I brought up countless times while living in the state and watching politics there. But alas, it is Massachusetts, which means that Democratic incumbents are protected at all costs. There were some citizens groups looking at the redistricting process but I think that was more about protecting incumbents and keeping an eye on then-Speaker of the House Tom Finneran, who was later indicted for perjury over the redistricting issue [Does anyone recall whatever became of his case?].

Splitting up the 8th or 9th?
The 8th District, currently served by Michael Capuano, is the alleged minority-majority district even though a minority has little chance of winning the seat. No matter what they do to "set aside" districts, minorities have had difficulty winning primaries in Massachusetts. Deval Patrick is the one exception; Andrea Cabral, who was challenged by Stephen Murphy for the Suffolk County Sheriff's seat, is another. But in an eight or 10-way race for Congress, both Cabral and Patrick would lose, especially when competing against ethic whites, super-progressives, and millionaires, in Congressional races.
No one seems to be pushing Mike out any time soon either, that we know of. So why bother worrying about the set aside district? Well, it makes the redistricters feel good about trying to do something for minorities when in fact, it isn't anything at all. Which seems silly if you really think about it.
However, in the wake of losing a Congressional seat, there could be a move on to eliminate the 8th or the 9th District seats. The logic would be to push one of the two newest members of Congress out: Capuano was elected in 1998; Lynch in 2001 after the passing of Joe Moakley. The others could say, "Hey Mike and Stevie, fuggetaboutit ... one of youse is outta here."
Possible scenarios for this could be shifting Somerville into the 7th and splitting up the 8th evenly between the 9th and 4th, with other districts shifting west; or moving the 9th's Boston neighborhoods into the 8th and split up the 9th amongst the 4th and 10th, with the other districts, again, moving west. The former would be a way of pushing Capuano out with the latter, pushing Lynch out. The shift of Somerville into the 7th was floated quietly back in 2002 but never made any headway.
Let's take the Somerville move first.
Capuano would have two choices: Face off against Markey in the new 7th or sell his nice house on the hill and buy a condo somewhere in the rest of the 8th. This would mean facing off against the other person for the 8th, more than likely, either Lynch or Frank, depending on where the redistricting went or where Capuano bought the new house.
Facing off against Markey would be Capuano's best option because he could beat Markey in a bloody primary [It would be great to see how the media covered such a race and it would be a fun race to cover]. Here is why I think Capuano would beat Markey. First, Capuano is a rough-and-tumble pol compared to Markey being kind of an empty suit. Second, the 7th is more Italian than ever. It was more Irish when Markey was elected in the 1970s. Not any more. Third, the area is more college-oriented, young people oriented, and yuppie-oriented than before. Which do you think is more in touch with these constituents? Fourth, Markey is clueless on a slew of issues. He is a paper tiger at best, having voted for the stupid invasion of Iraq, terrible trade bills, and the 1996 Telecom Bill which consolidated TV and radio stations into a handful of corporations. Capuano has been a solid progressive since being elected. Capuano would get the more liberal votes in the district. Advantage: Capuano.
Let's take a look at the other option.
Shifting Boston's other neighborhoods into the 8th would essentially put Lynch out of work. It would be an interesting race but Capuano would probably prevail. While Lynch would take Southie and Dorchester easily, Capuano would hang onto Somerville and Eastie. The fight would then go down to Boston and Cambridge, with Capuano beating out the pro-life Lynch in those areas easily. Chelsea would probably be a toss up. Advantage: Capuano.
The 8th could also be totally split apart, gobbled up by bordering the 4th, 7th, and 9th.
That has happened in the past when Massachusetts has lost seats. While it is considered "The historic 8th District" - even the Chicago Tribune had an article on the great 1998 race - it has changed since the days when JFK and Tip O'Neill represented it.
Splitting apart the 8th, however, would create a whole slew of other problems, specifically, the metropolitan area being represented by three separate representatives instead of two. That could be a net positive though - especially the creation of more realistic districts in the southern part of the state which is seeing the most growth. The urban compact would also get more clout with three representatives thinking about it instead of two.
However, having Capuano face off against Lynch or Frank, in hypothetical primaries with a split up 8th, would almost be doom for him. Lynch has Southie locked up and I don't know if Capuano could compete for votes in places like Brockton, Norwood, and Milton. He would say he could, but I doubt it. Frank, a "minority," he's openly gay, would easily out liberal Capuano and beat him in the more progressive areas of the 8th, like Cambridge. Frank is also solid in places like Brookline and Newton.
Since the state Legislature decides how things are redistricted, neither Capuano nor Lynch, or frankly, any other incumbent Congressman, has any control over how the process goes. Lynch, a former state Senator, would probably have more influence over the Legislature than Capuano. There are also a lot of conservative Irish pols still on Beacon Hill who would probably back Lynch. But there are also very liberal members of the Legislature who probably wouldn't be too keen on eliminating a staunchly pro-choice and progressive Congressman [Capuano] over a very conservative, pro-life Congressman [Lynch] who also voted for the invasion of Iraq and other Bush policies. Advantage: Lynch, although very slim.

Other dynamics
Throw in these dynamics too: The gubernatorial seat could be open again in 2010, assuming Deval Patrick only serves one term or is elevated to the Senate in some way; Sen. Edward Kennedy's seat will more than likely be up in 2012, although Teddy has given no indication that he plans on retiring any time soon; and Another presidential election will be occurring in 2012 and there is always the dynamic of that, although I don't see any of the current Congressional membership - or Sen. John Kerry, for that matter - being presidential timber by that time.
The larger point to all this speculating is the fact that potentially losing this one Congressional seat creates an interesting dynamic in the state. What would happen if some truly independent people were allowed to sit down with all the numbers and were given the chance to map the state in a way which is best for the state and the voters? What would happen if these people were allowed to look at the data without any preconceived agendas, biases, or any regard to where incumbents lived? The state might actually get some real representation and a fairer democracy.
You can do your own speculating by looking at the Secretary of State's map here: ["Massachusetts Congressional Districts"], looking up some population numbers, noodling around a bit. It will be a fun experiment over the next few years, to say the least.

N.H. Blog-Con

“Blog Free or Die” was the theme at the first New Hampshire Bloggers Convention, held this afternoon at the Common Man Restaurant in Concord. The event was organized by TJ of Better Living through Chemistry [Terry Connor], with some help from Joanie from Grain of Salt, although she denies it. More than 25 bloggers from around the state attended.
I decided to go for a couple of hours and also interviewed TJ for some audio for the news department at WKXL 1450 [I will post the audio story after I get done putting it together tonight or tomorrow].
The group had collected in the lounge of the Common Man because no one really knew how many people were going to show up. Why spend money on a room or hall if no one was going to show, the logic would go? Next year, I hope it will be bigger and better, possibly an all-day event, with seminars and talks, especially with the primary rolling around. Maybe I'm jumping the gun and thinking too hard about it but I don't think so. However, it was a good first meeting.
The crowd was diverse and interesting, with a mix of political bloggers, parents doing blogs, some folks from Area603, and some political bloggers. There was talk of how to juggle life, family, and blogging, how to increase traffic, and different kinds of technology used. No one seemed to mind that I was a blogger and a member of the media - I guess we are all members of the media in our own way. Because it was so loud in the lounge and I knew I wasn't going to remember everyone’s name or sites, I started to pass around my steno pad to collect as many blog names as I could [the names and links are below].
A few thoughts: While New Hampshire is a small state, this was a good first meeting and a pretty good turn out. I sense that the blogs will remain healthy because there seems to be a lot of interest and energy from this crowd. I was surprised that I had probably been blogging longer than anyone else in the crowd. Some had just started their blogs, which was cool. Granted, I've been writing columns, music articles, and other things for more than two decades, just not on the Web that long.
After making the rounds, I finally found where the political bloggers were hanging out and began to throw myself into their conversations. One of them, Jen Wrobleski, who works for a company Netvocates.com, used to be my media contact at the state GOP. I was also surprised to find out that not all Republicans in this state are gun owners. I was surprised not to see any exclusively liberal political bloggers. I was also surprised not to see any of the most recent political blogs to spring up, like Blue Granite and NH-02 Progressive nor others like NHPolitics.com, PoliticsNH.com, or any of the other more established political Web sites. There was enough press about the event - The Hippo had a piece and lots of people linked comments about it, promoting the event - but whatever. Oh well. I was also surprised that I was the only member of the media attending the event to find out who these people were and what they are about. No Monitor reporter; No UL reporter; although there were some folks from the Nashua Telegraph, which seems forward-thinking in their approach to blogs, having created Area603 and also posting blog links on its own Web site. The lack of media presence may be the lack of understanding about the blogging process or the lack of acknowledgement that this is the wave of the future.

Here are some of the bloggers in attendance and their sites:

Better Living through Chemistry: http://blog.virtualdominion.net/
Grain of Salt: http://blog.grain-of-salt.com/
Wizbang!: http://wizbangblog.com/
Pun Salad: http://okoboji.unh.edu/punsalad/
Chasing Grace: http://grace.asilgrif.org/
Spina Bifida Moms - Sweetie & Me: http://spinabifidamoms.blogspot.com/
Southern New Hampshire Parents: http://www.snhparents.com/
Off Campus: http://offcampus.blogspot.com/
Someone's in the kitchen with daddy: http://daddywhatareyoudoing.wordpress.com/
Blanchard Creative Woodworking: http://snbcreative.wordpress.com/
A Dog-Eared Dog: http://gryffynz.asilgrif.org/blog/
American Barbarian: http://americanbarbarian.blogspot.com/
Dujour.us: http://www.dujour.us/
Dispatches from Blogblivion: http://blogblivion.com/
Weekend Pundit: http://weekendpundit.blogmosis.com/
Methuselah's Daughter: http://www.3500years.com/
Margaret Evans Porter: http://www.margaretevansporter.com/
Ernesto Burden: http://ernesto.burdenfamily.net/
Contratimes: http://contratimes.blogspot.com/
The Pop Diner: http://blogs.nashuatelegraph.com/the_pop_diner

Thanks again for the invite and the best to all of you. Long live New Hampshire bloggers!
Crossposted at Area603 and The Concord Journal, a new blog I'm doing for NewHampshire.com.

Remembering a dear friend
On Sunday night, I received a phone call from a former political acquaintance of mine from Boston, completely out of the blue. When I saw the Caller ID, I gasped knowing it was probably bad news and I answered the phone.
Instead of saying, “Hello?” or “Hi,” I said, “Oh I hope this isn’t bad news …” almost thinking that it might be a joke call or one of those old friends reaching out because they've discovered they could find people on Google.
Unfortunately, it was bad news.
As it turned out, Eddie, a good friend of mine, passed away suddenly from a drug overdose and the caller wanted me to know about it. I was shocked by the news and started to well up, especially knowing that my late friend had battled substance abuse previously in his life and had been sober for a very long time.
We talked small talk and agreed to have lunch sometime. We do have a lot of catching up to do and I'm sure I will get an earful about all the bad things I've written about his former boss, Sen. John Kerry.
After I hung up the phone, I just stared at the floor. My wife, who had heard part of the call, remembered Eddie well and was also shocked by the news. I hadn’t spoken to him in years, but I regularly wondered how he was doing because for a number of years, he was an integral part of my life. And now, he was gone.
Eddie and I became close, fast friends in late 1991, after we were both drawn to the presidential campaign of former California Governor Jerry Brown. Both of us were Democrats - I was sick of the party, and looking for something new and Brown raised many of the feelings and frustrations which I had with the political system at the time. I still do have many of the same feelings – as do many other people – but this was before DailyKos and Internet chat boards where people could vent. Eddie was from a more establishment political background – Irish Catholic, Hyde Park – and some his friends laughed at him when he said he had decided to volunteer for Brown.
Over the course of many months, Eddie and I and many others would travel all over the east coast, organizing for Brown. It was a blast and one of the best experiences of my life [Someday, I will be able to put my book together and share all those great memories].
We really thought we were on the cusp of something really big, reform-minded, and special … something many of the people who are involved in the Democratic Party think they are involved with now even though they aren’t really.
Eddie took time to share his life with me; I was a bit more of an open book. Although, when I started to learn about his life, I gained great respect for him, his sobriety, and the hard time he had improving his life. We became more attached, would have coffee and would talk for hours. If I wanted to drink, he was comfortable with that, but I always offered not to drink if it bothered him. It never did. We would talk about failed policy, what we would do if we were in power, and future political ambitions. Eddie wanted to be Suffolk County sheriff but believed he needed to reach a level of maturity so that past indiscretions would be forgotten.
“Twenty five years,” he once told me. “After my law degree.”
I was still wishing I could be a senator some day even though, deep-down, I knew I would never get elected in a place like Massachusetts because despite some liberal views, I really did support Brown’s flat tax plan. I also wasn’t willing to part with my Bordeaux-colored locks or hard living rock ‘n’ roll lifestyle … at least not yet.
Later, after the Brown campaign, Eddie introduced me to then-City Councilor Tom Menino from his Hyde Park neighborhood. Menino was planning a run for Mayor and Eddie asked me to organize Back Bay and the South End for Menino which I happily did. Menino later won, becoming the longest-serving Mayor in Boston’s history.
Eddie also introduced me to District Attorney Ralph Martin, a black Republican who received a lot of Democratic support and also won his race.
And when Sen. Ted Kennedy was in a troubled reelection campaign against Mitt Romney in 1994 and they put out the call out for hire guns, Eddie told the campaign that I should be hired. The next thing I know, I’m organizing all the college campuses in the eastern part of the state and getting a check too. I learned a lot of good and bad things in that two month time period but I don't regret it.
Eddie was one of my first Instant Message pals on AOL as we both started learning about computers and the Internet. In my case, I started dating a graphic artist who helped me learn the value of the tool; Eddie started going to night school to get to that law degree and needed a computer. It was a pretty good time.
We kept in touch over the next few years as Eddie and others tried to land me a city job so that I would have the stability to go to college. Interview after interview after interview, I just couldn't get in because there were other people getting in to the lower skilled jobs and there were affirmative action quotas which needed to be obtained in order to make sure the city workforce reflected the makeup of the city. This frustrated me - being a lower middle class white person making $7 an hour trying to make ends meet - but I understood the logic.
After a slew of interviews over 18 months, Eddie told me it probably wasn't going to happen so I moved on, eventually getting a second job, a part-time radio board op gig, to subsidize my income. That job eventually led to a full-time radio gig but not much more money.
Later, in 1997, when I found out the City of Boston was going to cancel a preliminary election for its at-large city council race because there weren’t enough people running, I called Eddie and asked if he thought that I should run. He asked me what I would work on if elected. I said I would campaign on a platform of more affordable housing, preserving more open space, limited campaign donations, and a local currency program called Boston Bucks, a few ideas that I was toying with after reading the Boston Globe article about the cancelled election. The hot button issue at the time was the Mayor’s $7 an hour living wage ordinance. I told Eddie I would openly be campaigning against the ordinance and he asked me why, probably thinking I would catch holy hell and be linked as anti-union like the insipid Back Bay Councilor Tom Keane.
“Well, it isn’t good enough,” I said.
After that, Eddie said he would help if I decided to run.
After hemming and hawing for a few days trying to decide what to do, I jumped in on a lark with just five days to gather the 500 signatures to get on the ballot. In just a few days, Eddie hanging out in Hyde Park, myself in East Boston, the North End, and South Boston, and a couple of his friends hanging out at grocery stores in West Roxbury, collected more than 1,100 signatures in a few days to force a preliminary election. In just a few weeks, after a quick letter telling people I knew about the race, we had more than $3,000 to pay for all the signs, some small newspaper ads, and other stuff campaigns need [As an aside, the two big news/talk stations – WBZ and WRKO – refused to sell me radio ads because they didn’t want to have to offer a discounted rate to any of the political candidates. They refused to sell radio ads to the candidate who was working in radio. I was livid but this was on the cusp of the dot-con boom when WBZ was getting $900 a spot in morning drive! It was a lousy business model and later, when they did offer radio ads to the finalists, I was even more pissed].
I ended up losing the preliminary by a couple of hundred votes after a concerted effort by at least one other campaign to throw votes to an unknown candidate from Dorchester to keep me out of the final. At least two reporters the day after the election were nudging me about the theory although no one ever had any proof, it was all entirely hearsay.
I think I made some good points in that campaign. And, what I found out was that I loved campaigning even more than I did previously, especially if it was my own.
As Eddie started to raise a family and go to law school, we lost touch a bit but we would see each other a couple of times a year. When I was attending Harvard Extension School at night, we ran into each other and had a long talk in the yard which we had to break off because it was freezing cold outside.
Then, like so many other friends over the years, we lost touch. I heard he we was working selling computers with a family member. But, I never stopped thinking about Eddie. And now he is gone.
On Sunday, I thought about all those years and how just one life can affect another person so much. It was totally random, our meeting and friendship. It could have happened with anyone or it might not have happened at all. I thought about his adorable little children who will now be without a father. And I sat dumbfounded on my couch, furious that heroin had taken another person I knew and in this case, someone who shouldn’t have lost the battle because he had it beat. That damn evil filthy friggin' heroin. Arrgh.
Goodbye dear friend. I will really miss you. But I also know you are in a better place now and soon, we will all be joining you and we can enjoy the perpetual campaign.
Crossposted at Area603

Mexican recount
Imagine, millions of people protesting because of an election result. Seems impossible, doesn't it? Well, it happened, in Mexico today. A general strike is called for later this week.

WTO: Trade hawk Bill Greider has another piece on the WTO debacle: ["Whither the WTO"].

Terror again? OKBomb perps to assist Hezbollah? This guy thinks so: ["OKLAHOMA TERROR NETWORK TO ASSIST HEZBOLLAH ATTACKS IN US?"].