Memorial Day Tribute

imageThis weekend we will celebrate Memorial Day as we honor our servicemen and women who have pledged to courageously defend this country at the risk of the ultimate sacrifice for freedom. It is also a time to remember the historic impact of the military on the lives of so many Americans and our moral responsibility to those who serve and sacrifice.

The history of the military in our everyday lives is a great equalizer when you consider the opportunities it has provided for so many.

Military pensions were the first public pension system in the United States which lead to retirement plans for non military personnel like teachers, firefighters, police and public employees.

History notes that Georgia Representative John Gibson left his sick bed in Georgia to return to Washington, DC to cast the critical tie-breaking vote for the Servicemen’s Readjustment Act of 1944 more commonly known as the GI Bill. President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed it into law on June 22, 1944. The passage of the bill offered education benefits to Americans who might never have seen such academic access. In 1947, veterans were nearly half of the nation’s registered college students. The bill also opened the doors to home ownership through low-interest, no-money-down mortgages, backed by the U.S. government. Many historians credit the legislation with igniting what we now call America’s middle class.

Back then the Veterans Administration (VA) was responsible for implementing the key provisions of the GI Bill, which included: education and training, loans for homes, farms or businesses, and for unemployment benefits.

Today the challenges of the VA to honorably serve those returning home from service is marked by federal investigations into the care it provides through its medical and mental health programs. This week in Atlanta, the Veterans Administration Medical Center named Leslie Wiggins as its new director. Her appointment comes at a time when the hospital has been the subject of federal investigations surrounding three deaths and allegations of lack of oversight and mismanagement at the facility.

As most of us enjoy the peace and safety of our daily lives, a few among us volunteer to serve as our protectors as they put themselves in harm’s way—-their service can never be forgotten.

2014 Georgia Elections Are Worth the Attention

Twit-FacebookThere’s been some encouraging news for Georgia Democrats this week. On Monday, Better Georgia released polling data that shows Georgia Democrats being competitive in Georgia’s 2014 open United States Senate race. In addition, Roll Call ran a piece about the groundwork that right wing conservative groups are doing to drop money in those races. On its face, the last piece of news doesn’t seem positive, but we think it is.

Earlier this year when Senator Saxby Chambliss announced he wasn’t going to run for re-election next fall it kicked off frenzy inside and outside of Georgia about the Democrats chances to gain the seat. Nationally, party insiders are salivating at Georgia’s changing demographics and the outcome of the 2012 presidential election in Georgia. Without any money directed to winning Georgia,President Obama received 46% of the vote, which was the best showing by Obama in any non-targeted state.

On Monday, Better Georgia released a poll testing Points of Light CEO Michelle Nunn’s bio against several potential Republican candidates. In almost all cases, Nunn was within the margin of error against all potential competitors and was eight points up against former gubernatorial candidate Karen Handel.

Despite the rosy poll results, it takes a lot of money to run a competitive statewide campaign for major office. Some will say this total is upwards of $10 million for a Senate race. To that end, Roll Call’s piece on Monday untangled a web of super PAC money likely coming to Georgia next year. Republicans Newt Gingrich, the Koch brothers and Las Vegas mogul Sheldon Anderson appear to be setting up shop in Georgia.

The mere notion that Anderson and the Koch brothers are coming to Georgia will scare some people. But Democrats shouldn’t worry too much. Democrats have proven in the last two election cycles that we can match the money and strategies of the best of the third party groups. There will be no more swift boating of democratic candidates without response. If the big GOP super PACs enter Georgia next year, they will likely be met by democratic super PACs.

Next year should be interesting. Georgia Democrats are making a comeback and next year is just the start. Expect new ideas, new candidates, and the best of all competitive races.

First Time Candidates Can Win

 

shirleynunnbloomberg

In 2008, hardly anyone other than a few of his closest associates and a handful of idealistic, smart, energetic and committed folks (and certainly none of those who now talk about who can and cannot win in Georgia) thought then freshman Illinois Senator Barack Obama had any chance of winning the Democratic nomination for president. Even if he won the nomination certainly few (Rev. Joseph Lowery, myself and a few other Georgia politicos) put much faith in his likely election as President of the United States.

In my case, before I was elected mayor of Atlanta, every mayor for at least 30 years before was an elected official.  Some people discounted my candidacy for that reason alone  and others because my name recognition was so low.  Even more people thought I could not win without a runoff against two city councilmembers.  I did.

The other challenge for first time candidates is fundraising. Pundits will say that unknown candidates can’t raise the amount of money needed to win a major race. I disagree. As an unknown candidate I raised $800,000 over the first ten months of my campaign and raised a total of $3 million for the general election. This fundraising total surpasses any other Atlanta mayoral candidate in history and was the 2nd most expensive US mayoral campaign of 2001 behind Michael Bloomberg’s race in New York.

Just a year ago most national media predicted a tight Presidential race and some even predicted President Obama could lose the election due to a bad economy, slow recovery and perceived loses of confidence of his political base. The South was expected to be impossible to penetrate. Yet voters in Virginia, the heart of Lee’s confederacy and Florida—not once but twice voted in favor of this maverick candidate. In Georgia, Obama won 47% of the vote in 2008 and 46% in 2012. Women voted for him and the African American and other minority vote was solid.

I trust the majority of Georgia voters are like other American voters who want honesty, intelligence and a commitment to the common good in their candidates; they will open their minds and consider voting for those candidates who speak and act honorably. If a candidate has a clear message, experience that is relevant and an approach to government and policy that is solution focused, Georgia voters will respond favorably.

As usual we will not all agree but there is little doubt that this Senate race has already created political buzz and anticipation.

Ga. Democrats still wander political wilderness

Senate Democrats Starting On The Defensive

Georgia Rep. Barrow Won’t Run for Senate

What Rough Beast Slouches Towards D.C. To Be Born?

gopnomineesBy Charles Cullen

I don’t think Yeats would mind me borrowing a few lines to describe our current political situation. In fact his poem, “The Second Coming,” perfectly describes my fear of the awful thing that lurks just off the horizon–only slightly out of sight.

It’s time we come to grips with the fact that we are going to elect a Republican President, and probably sooner rather than later. We have a great little system set up in the United States but it relies on both parties (and let’s be honest, we’re a two party country) to be relatively sane.

I’m very well aware of the fact that both parties have always enjoyed a handful of lunatics, but currently one of our two powerhouse parties can see Russia from its house, is pretty sure that a woman’s body has ways of shutting down any chance for pregnancy resulting from “legitimate rape,” ponders diplomatic relations with Uzbekibekibekistan, and thinks it’s appropriate to invite people who have talked openly about murdering the President to the State of the Union.

We all know how the game works. The populace allows one party to occupy the White House for a time, then switches over to the other side of the aisle. And there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. In theory, this system promotes new ideas, new solutions to our problems, and prevents the kind of oppression one sees when a single party holds near permanent sway. It’s a great instinct…unless one of our parties most celebrated members wants to build a “Moon Base.”

[Read more...]

California Proposition 8 “Splinters” Supreme Court

Latimes.com

latimes.com

Rare 4-1-4 split decision predicted

For the past year, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg has been giving speeches on Roe v. Wade indicating that the High Court should have taken a “go slow” approach on the social issue of abortion. Justice Ginsberg noted that the decision ignited a culture war and stopped the democratic process from working to repeal, through political debate and discourse, abortion laws at the state level. Ginsberg noted that if she had it to do all over again she would recommend a “limited ruling” verses the court forcing a decision onto the body politic at large. With the California Prop 8 case, the shadow of Roe v. Wade looms large.

During oral arguments, the High Court quickly divided in the well-known 4 – 4 camp of liberal vs. conservative justices. However, most telling was Justice Anthony Kennedy, a key swing voter on many gay rights issues. In his questioning and comments, Kennedy implied that he was unwilling to assert or could see where there is a constitutional right to same sex marriage. Kennedy noted in both the Prop 8 case and the Defense of Marriage Act case that traditionally states have always regulated marriage, divorce, and child custody laws and regulations.

[Read more...]

High Court Signals Defense of Marriage Act Likely to fall

New York Times

New York Times

Justice Kennedy expresses skepticism over the Federal Government “defining” marriage

Justice Anthony Kennedy, whom court watchers call the key vote, was openly hostile to attorney Peter Clement, the attorney defending the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) before the High Court yesterday. While Kennedy signaled in the California Proposition 8 case that he is not willing to declare there is a “constitutional right” to same sex marriage, was very disparaging of the federal government’s refusal, vis-à-vis DOMA, to honor and recognize same sex marriages legalized by the democratic process in states either through the legislative process or by ballot initiative.

The case, officially known as “Windsor v. the United States of America,” centers on Windsor having to pay a $363,000 estate tax bill when her wife died. The state of New York legally recognized Ms. Windsor’s marriage from Canada – the Internal Revenue Service did not. Thus, Windsor was forced to pay the whopping estate tax bill when her wife, Thea Spyer, died. However, the case is just more than about estate taxes. According to the Los Angeles Times, over 130,000 legally married gay Americans are denied federal benefits because of DOMA – from healthcare benefits, military spousal benefits to Social Security.

[Read more...]

Do Conservatives Care About Black People?

By Charles Cullen

kanye-west-michael-myers-george-bush-dont-like-black-peopleFebruary 27 – Many will remember Kanye West’s live television outburst in which he noted that “George Bush doesn’t care about Black people.” I remember it fondly because it’s the most uncomfortable anyone has ever seen comedian Mike Myers. Go ahead, look up the youtube clip and marvel at the absolute shock on his face. You’ll get a kick out of it, it’ll cheer you up, and it’ll help keep your mind off the depressing fact that conservative U.S. Supreme Court Justices seem determined to show us just how little they care about African Americans, or, for that matter, minorities in general.

Specifically, they don’t care about minority’s ability to vote without having to avoid road blocks set up by the state in which they are trying to exercise their constitutionally protected right to make themselves heard at the polls.

[Read more...]

Obama Administration “Go Slow” Approach on Gay Marriage

Credit: Allen J. Schaben / Los Angeles Times

Credit: Allen J. Schaben / Los Angeles Times

Ruling Recommendation Would Not Bring Gay Marriage to Red States

The Obama Justice Department has submitted an Amicus Brief with recommendations to the Supreme Court to “go slow” in its pending decisions that would potentially affect gay marriage laws nation-wide. The Justice Department, while refusing to defend the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) before the High Court, has recommend to the court to limit its scope and opinion to Section 3 of DOMA that prohibits gay married couples from receiving the same federal benefits as heterosexual married couples. This narrow ruling would not overturn Georgia’s Defense of Marriage Act or other similar constitutional amendments or laws in 37 other states.

The “logic” behind recommending such a narrow ruling would in effect, overturn California’s Proposition 8, a voter-based initiative prohibiting same-sex marriage. It would also uphold the lower court ruling in Windsor v. the United States of America – where Edith Windsor, who was legally married to her lesbian partner, had to pay $363,000 in Federal estate taxes when Thea Spyer died – a heterosexual couple would not have had to pay this tax. This approach is also known in civil rights legal circles as “the eight state solution.”

In “the eight state solution”, the court is urged to view discrimination against the L,B,G,T community as “akin to gender bias.” Such a ruling would potentially recognize L,B,G,T citizens as a “protected class” under U.S. civil rights law and possibly open the door to a state-by-state challenge to state DOMA laws and constitutional amendments on the grounds that state cannot legally justify why gay and lesbian persons should be treated any different under state marriage laws. Rather than legalize gay marriage in one fell swoop, the High Court could allow the national debate on gay marriage to continue without forcing Red states, like Georgia (and the Deep South), to immediately legalize same-sex marriage.

Lastly, national opinion still trends towards legalizing same sex marriage in the U.S. While it is thought the High Court tends to take the pulse of the public on controversial issues, Justice Anthony Kennedy is seen as the “lynch pin” in what the court will do. Kennedy has been a stalwart supporter of free speech, individual liberty and willing to place limits on government authority. All eyes will be on Kennedy and the questions he poses to both sides of these cases. Gay marriage may or may not be coming to Georgia – all dependent on the scope of the High Court’s approach.

Will Roberts Court Ditch Voting Rights?

350px-Supreme_Court_US_2010Yesterday the United States Supreme Court heard arguments in the Shelby County, Ala., v. Holder case, which may have serious implications for key provisions of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. This landmark civil rights measure was intended to protect voting rights of minorities in several, mostly southern, states.

The popular argument being made by conservatives, in court and on the talk show circuit, is that states should be treated equally. We agree. We believe that instead of repealing provisions of the Voting Rights Act, we should extend it to all states.

The mere notion that we are even talking about releasing states from Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act is laughable. Over the last decade one political party has pushed to make it more difficult for citizens to cast their votes. Imagine what they would do if no one was monitoring them.

Actually we know what they would do. Republicans in non-Section 5 states throughout the United States have instituted voter ID laws, restricted voting days and hours, and gerrymandered whenever politically possible. As a result many of these states will have majority Republican congressional delegations for years to come and laws that make it harder to vote.

Based on the arguments today, many are predicting that the court will strike Section 5 down with Justice Anthony Kennedy casting the decisive vote. If that happens Congress will likely be tasked with drafting new voting laws in the near future. And guess who controls Congress? Republicans because of the same gerrymandering practices that section 5 seeks to block.

The Nimzo-Indian Defence

chessChess nerds will recognize the “Nimzo-Indian Defence” as an effective, if rudimentary, opening when playing as black. For those not fortunate enough to be chess nerds, here’s a brief description of the opening by Tony Kosten. Kosten writes “When Nimzowitsch introduced his defence in the 1920′s, his idea was that Black would fight for control of the centre […] with pieces other than pawns. His concept, the Nimzo-Indian Defence rapidly became one of Black’s most popular defences and established a reputation for offering a wide range of strategically rich possibilities.”

After participating in a nationwide Organizing for Action call with Chicago Mayor Rahm Emmanuel and Chief Economist and Cabinet member Austan Goolsbee, I am more certain than ever that there were sophisticated political undertones to President Obama’s State of the Union address; suggesting that he is playing political chess, while the republicans wait for him at the checkers board. Particularly relevant seems his decision to single out Georgia and Oklahoma as beacons of hope when it comes to effective, productive, early education.

A big part of the Nimzo-Indian defence is forcing your will upon your opponent by offering choices that seem impossible to pass up. And this is essentially what Obama is doing by focusing on red states and forcing Republican leaders to either stand against the education reforms they themselves had a part in creating (and doing so simply because the President says he likes them) or going along with the President and his desire to see every child enrolled in high quality early education.

The focus of this Organizing for Action call was supposed to be jobs, but time and time again both Goolsbee and Emmanuel returned to the issue of early and available education, making it a point to single out red states for praise. Things like this don’t happen by accident, and my ears perked up when Mayor Emmanuel pivoted a jobs question into a discussion of the interesting early education programs in (you guessed it) Georgia, Oklahoma, and Tennessee. Emmanuel argued for the necessity of a “race to the top,” reiterated the President’s call for “full-day pre-K,” and expanded on the President’s plan by suggesting the idea of teaching “parent’s how to be parents” as a part of the administration’s overall education initiative.

Emmanuel accused the Republican Congress of governing “from the outside in.” Suggesting that they are not only out of touch, but would do well to govern from the inside…by accepting the President’s plans for early education. Goolsbee echoed many of Emmanuel’s sentiments regarding education while also getting a dig in at the Republicans for our current, ridiculous sequester boondoggle. He also promised that “courageous votes” would be taken–over, of course, Republican objection–on “gun control,” and “immigration.”

Anyone who’s ever lost a game of Chess knows how the Republicans must be feeling in private. For all their posturing and ridiculous filibustering, they don’t really know what they’re doing. Heads in hands they find themselves in the shocked stasis of defeat—a splintered, weak, directionless party wondering helplessly where it all went wrong.

This blog post was written by Blogging While Blue contributer Charles Cullen and was originally featured on ProgressivePopulist.blogspot.com