Last weekend when we launched this contest, who would have suspected we would take in over $33,000 for our 9 congressional candidates! Blue America decided to offer $5,000 to the candidate who got the most votes (in the form of online contributions) this week. The campaigns that worked their e-mail lists and their local blogs wound up bringing in thousands of dollars. In total over 1,300 donations came pouring in.

What all of these candidates have in common is that each is a solid progressive and that none are in the DCCC Red to Blue program yet. That program is a signal to wealthy and to institutional Democratic donors that the party bosses are taking the race seriously and it makes it much easier for the campaigns to raise money. We figured that candidates not on the list were the ones who need our help the most right now. Peterr from FDL, with some assistance from Jacqui, outlined just what the $5,000 would buy, media-wise, for a campaign struggling to get a message out.

All but one of our 9 candidates-- the exception being Jared Polis, who's running for an open seat in Colorado-- are up against entrenched incumbents. But each of the entrenched incumbents has been a dependable Bush rubber stamp and each is vulnerable on explosive issues like high gasoline prices, the war in Iraq, and substandard health care. Many of them-- like Dennis Shulman's, Annette Taddeo's and Barry Welsh's opponents, respectively Scott Garrett, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen and Mike Pence-- are extreme right-wing ideologues, far beyond the mainstream and completely out of sync with the voters in their own districts. But none of our candidates' opponents are moderates and, although some try to portray themselves otherwise, each has a disgraceful voting record at great variance with their constituent's best interests. And each is massively well-financed, primarily by the corporate special interests whose business has been as well attended to as the district's has been all but ignored.

As of June 30 this is what each of our candidates and their opponents had on hand:

Sam Bennett (D-PA- $353,774) v Charlie Dent (R- $686,686)
Debbie Cook (D-CA- $97,392) v Dana Rohrabacher (R- $387,950)
Larry Joe Doherty (D-TX- $259,792) v Michael McCaul (R- $489,054)
Alan Grayson (D-FL- $344,793) v Ric Keller (R- $935,186)
Jared Polis (D-CO- $866,865) v Scott Starin (R- $5,775)
Dennis Shulman (D-NJ- $258,381) v Scott Garrett (R- $649,003)
Annette Taddeo (D-FL- $457,105) v Ileanna Ros-Lehtinen (R- $1,893,392)
Russ Warner (D-CA- $124,896) v David Dreier (R- $1,903,654)
Barry Welsh (D-IN- $7,533) v Mike Pence (R- $739,104)

You can see what each of our candidates has managed to bring in since last Saturday on our special contest page. Many overly enthusiastic donors gave more than once-- some more than a dozen times-- to the candidates of their choice. To determine the winner of our prize, only one donation per candidate is counted for any one screen name. The contest remains open until 12 noon (PT), so, by all means, please donate to the candidate, or candidates, of your choice. We have also gotten a generous donation of $1,250 to the Blue America PAC from an anonymous donor who has asked that we match it and donate $2,500 to the runner-up. So... if you'd like to support that proposition, by all means drop some cash into the Blue America PAC slot as well.

Meanwhile at 9AM this morning, we got this awesomely generous letter from Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Chairman of the DCCC. Before I share it with you, just let me remind everyone that when Rahm Emanuel and Steny Hoyer beat up on a bunch of Democrats and led enough across the aisle to help the Republicans pass Bush's continuing occupation of Iraq and, a week later, his hideous FISA legislation, Van Hollen, was one of the few in the Democratic leadership who refused to join them on either. Like a majority of Democrats, Chris voted to end the war and voted against the FISA bill. His letter:

Please offer my thanks to the Blue American community for their continued help to our Democratic candidates. Mobilizing grassroots supporters is crucial in our campaign to strengthen and secure the Democratic Majority. The outpouring of support that the Blue America community has shown this week for our Democratic candidates for change has been particularly exciting. I am pleased to match Blue America's $5000 contribution to the winner of your "Vote For A Blue America
Candidate" contest. I thank you for your continuing support in securing a New Direction for America.

Warm Regards,

Chris Van Hollen
Chairman

Translation: today's winner gets $10,000, not $5,000. And... futhermore there's a bonus for our donors today too! Anybody who contributes at least $25.00 before noon will be entered in a drawing to win two (2) fourth row center tickets to the Jackson Browne concert at the historic Orpheum theatre in Los Angeles on October 5th.

Here's how it usually works: public official says X, the media plays it up as bigger than it was meant factually. Public official then has to rollback the media spin, the other side gets their hands on it and blows it out of proportion entirely. More walk back ensues and then every side of the issue gets peeved. It's no wonder most pols don't open their mouths about anything of import these days if they can help it.

Which made the Biden statement kind of intriguing.

Howie wrote it up, pointing to some reporting on ABC. I had previously seen it in the TelegraphUK as well. Then, this appeared, sort of walking it back -- but not in the usual way:

Asked about the comment this morning on Fox News, Biden said it is Congress -- not a potential Obama administration -- that is investigating the White House.

And he denied today that an Obama administration would launch criminal investigations against the 43rd president of the United States.

"The Obama-Biden administration is not going to start off saying, "God, let's go take a lot at what [happened]." The American people want to know what we're going to do, not what happened."

I'd like to think that Biden means it when he says Congress is looking into this thoroughly. And that he trusts them to get to the bottom of criminal activity, and that a new administration's DOJ would prosecute wrongdoing whose statute of limitations hasn't yet expired.

When we were at the DNC in Denver, I had a chance to speak with Sen. Leahy about the SJC's efforts, and he was clearly beyond angry at what has happened with the DOJ's reputation and the Bush Administration's devastating impact on the rule of law. But he is one Senator, albeit a fairly powerful one, out of 100 -- and, sad to say, too many of the others aren't willing to risk sticking their necks out for justice.

What I do not want? The same zombie criminals like John Poindexter, Richard Perle, Dick Cheney and their ilk rising from the Iran-Contra crypt to once again "serve" in government, recycling their retread cliches to line the pockets of their pals while they fear-monger our way to a worse, conservative tomorrow.

And if there is no accountability? I fear that is exactly the future we can expect. Again. Haven't we all had enough of this, yet?

(YouTube -- The Rainmakers, Let My People Go-Go.)

"I want you all to stonewall it, let them plead the Fifth Amendment, cover up, or anything else," Richard Nixon said privately to his closest associates on March 22, 1973. Publicly, on April 17, 1973, when this picture was taken, the President said, "I condemn any attempts to cover up in this case, no matter who is involved." -- The Washington Post

Everybody's favorite Dominionist anti-choice scandal-plagued governor is at it again, this time in an effort to obstruct justice:

Gov. Sarah Palin is taking the wrong approach to Troopergate. She should be practicing the open and transparent, ethical and accountable government she promised when running for governor and boasts about now that she's on the national stage.

Instead, Gov. Palin has begun stonewalling the Legislature's attempt to get the bottom of allegations that she, her family or staff violated ethical or state personnel rules.

As a result, the Troopergate allegations hang over Palin's future and cloud her candidacy for vice president.

The allegations are that she, her family or administration improperly pressured then-Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan to fire Gov. Palin's ex-brother-in-law, state trooper Mike Wooten, who had been in the middle of a custody dispute with Palin's sister.

 [...]

Palin's lawyer has asked the Legislature to drop its investigation. He had the governor file an ethics complaint against herself, in a bid to turn the entire matter over to the state Personnel Board, which would hire an independent investigator.

This is not an open and transparent attempt to establish Gov. Palin's accountability. It is an attempt to drag out the investigation until after voters decide the fate of her vice-presidential bid.

Now, one would think that if Sarah Palin has nothing to hide, that she would welcome this investigation, as she had claimed she did earlier this year when the news first hit.  An innocent person would love the chance to clear her name once and for all.

Instead, we get stupidly thuggish stalling and intimidation efforts like this one:

Gov. Sarah Palin's lawyer, Thomas Van Flein, made an absurd threat in his battle to get the Legislature to back off its ethics investigation of the governor and her staff.

Van Flein said legislative investigator Steve Branchflower tried to call First Gentleman Todd Palin directly on "a secure and confidential line. This represents a serious security breach that we may be obligated to report to the Secret Service."

Hello? Branchflower is acting on behalf of the Legislature. That's a security breach?

Lawyers are supposed to vigorously represent their clients, but claiming that a legislative investigator's phone call may be a security matter worthy of Secret Service attention is ridiculous.

Gov. Palin should keep her legal attack dog on a shorter leash.

BOTTOM LINE: More obstruction from Palin in Troopergate.

Thing is, all this stonewalling is probably too late -- damaging information, including a phone call between Palin staffer Frank Bailey and a state police official that ABC News acquired, has already come out, and more is yet to come, despite the McCain campaign's ham-handed Nixonian efforts to kill the investigation:

In a move endorsed by the McCain campaign Friday, John Coghill, the GOP chairman of the state House Rules Committee, wrote a letter seeking a meeting of Alaska's bipartisan Legislative Council in order to remove the Democratic state senator in charge of the so-called "troopergate" investigation.

Dumb move, Mr. Coghill.   You tried this while the whole world is watching, and now everyone is eager to see what you're trying so hard to cover up with too-cute stunts like this. Instead of making the investigation go away, it's now been fast-tracked.  Nice one, buddy.

Sometimes, you just need to start the day off with some Debussy.  And this performance is truly transcendent.

So glad someone had the foresight to pop this on YouTube and that I managed to stumble across it, because it truly is one of the most amazing ways to fill the start of your day. Leopold Stokowski conducts the London Symphony Orchestra, Royal Festival Hall, London, 14 June 1972, as they play "Prélude à l'après-midi d'un faune" by Claude Debussy.  Part II of the performance can be found here.

And I loved this in the description to the video:

Performed on the double occasion of Stokowski's 90th birthday, and 60th anniversary of his LSO debut. Though he conducted the entire program from that 1912 concert, it was this Debussy performance folks recall most memorably....

Christopher Palmer wrote in "The Musical Times" that "My most treasured memory of the evening is undoubtedly 'Prélude à l'après-midi d'un faune', which received a reading of exceptional refinement with all the tensions and relaxations effortlessly and beautifully graded, and unerringly poetic solo work from all the woodwind. A flawless performance."

...in "The Daily Telegraph" Peter Stadlen wrote "Stokowski's legendary hands, though batonless, are put to the strictest functional use. His angular, almost ungainly movements are the simple tools for some of he most masterly conducting the century has witnessed....by what seemingly incongruous flicks of the wrist did he promote the fabulously sensitve solos in 'Prélude à l'après-midi d'un faune'? Never has lifelong global fame rested on more solid foundations."

When I was in graduate school, I splurged and bought myself a season ticket for the Philadelphia Symphony Orchestra. I had nosebleed seats so high into the rafters that there were no seats behind me, but the sound was exquisite nonetheless. Didn't really have the money for the ticket, but the ramen noodle meals were worth every note they allowed me to hear.  

I played several instruments growing up, including the flute, but never this well.  So do sit back and enjoy another cuppa coffee and absorb the beauty of this performance.  Just lovely.

I miss being somewhere that an orchestra regularly plays, but the trade-off is being serenaded by the birdies on my feeders every morning and watching the butterflies chase each other across the tops of my butterfly bush outside the sunroom windows.  And as The Peanut gets older, perhaps we'll work in some performances at the university, because I want her to learn to appreciate the emotion and beauty of music as much as we do.  The only way you learn is to experience it for yourself.  I cannot wait for our first concert together.

What's been your bliss this week? Pull up a chair...

Bettye Lavette performs Sleep to Dream & I Do Not Want What I Haven't Got.

What's on your mind tonight?

Sarah Palin by Roche

According to Rasmussen, she a hit:

The Palin pick has also improved perceptions of John McCain. A week ago, just before he introduced his running mate, just 42% of Republicans had a Very Favorable opinion of their party’s nominee. That figure jumped to 54% by this Friday morning. Among unaffiliated voters, favorable opinions of McCain have increased by eleven percentage points in a week—from 54% before the Palin announcement to 65% today.

Fifty-one percent (51%) of all voters now believe that McCain made the right choice when he picked Palin to be his running mate while 32% disagree. By way of comparison, on the night after Biden gave his acceptance speech, 47% said that Obama made the right choice.

If that's all she does for the rest of the campaign, she's done more than most Vice Presidential candidates ever do for the ticket.

With a 58% favorability rating, she's also now more popular than Obama or McCain (both at 57%) and Biden (48%).

I stand by my assertion that anyone who watched her speech and concluded that she would not be a formidable opponent is engaging in wishful thinking.

The government has formulated a plan to put troubled mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac under federal control, dismiss their top executives, and use government funds to prop them up...

Under the plan, the federal government would place the firms in a legal state known as conservatorship, the sources said. The value of the company's common stock would be diluted but not wiped out while the holdings of other securities, including company debt and preferred shares, would be protected by the government.

Details are scarce, my best guess based on past musing is that they will issue preferred stock that the government will buy as their means of putting money into the two companies. Because that stock will have preference over common shares, the value of common shares will plummet, but not be wiped out. Debtors won't lose a cent, probably intended to avoid a cascade of credit swaps, as Morgenson pointed out. The original plan was to also wipe out preferred shares by making the new shares senior even to them, it looks like Paulson blinked on that.

This was probably necessary, and all the happy talk about how the cost of the bailout would only be 5 to 25 billion should now be seen as being as empty as it always was. If the bailout was only going to be 25 billion, this wouldn't be happening.

From a public policy point of view this is a bad way of doing something that's necessary. There's no particular reason why preferred shareholders shouldn't be wiped out along with common shareholders - owners of companies that go belly up should lose everything. Likewise, men like Pimco's Bill Gross made big bets by piling into Freddie and Fannie's debt in the expectation of a government bailout, when they knew that the debt was bad if the government didn't bail Freddie and Fannie out, and they are going to win those bets. Again, when normal companies go belly up, debtors don't get all their money up and one shouldn't be rewarding men who deliberately bought debt they knew was bad. Going into conservatorship is the equivalent of going belly up. Bondholders should take a haircut—they shouldn't lose everything, but they should certainly lose whatever they would have lost if Freddie and Fannie had been allowed to go bankrupt like normal companies. To not do so is a clear case of moral risk; a clear case of bailing investors out of their own bad decisions; and a clear case of shifting money from taxpayers to private interests.

Or, in other words, privatize the profits, socialize the risk.

Obviously, as Ishmael pointed out, bondholders (many of whom are foreign governments who are very unhappy about what is happening to their US holdings) put the pressure on, hard, and Treasury has folded.

Freddie and Fannie had to be bailed out, don't get me wrong, but this is about the worst way of doing it if your idea was to avoid moral risk and to protect the taxpayer's pocketbook, rather than those of investors.

I am also amused by two other items—first that they are going to dribble the money in in bits, rather than ponying up soon: Paulson "I won't be around when the real bill hits. Phew!"

And second, this:

Executives of the two companies were told to show up without being told of an agenda. Daniel Mudd, chief executive of Fannie Mae, was accompanied by outside lawyers.

Yeah... these guys know they were negligent at best. If I were Mudd, I'd keep lawyering up.

I will maintain my prediction that when all the costs are added up, years from now, the total bill will come to close to half a trillion.

Cartoon by Tom Toles

That stampeding sound you heard last night at the Republican National Convention? That was the sound of conservatives running away from their own record.

Says John McCain:

“Change is coming! Change is coming! Change is coming!”

“We need to change the way government does almost everything.”

Says Sarah Palin:

John McCain and I are ready to shake up Washington, ready to challenge the status quo, to serve the common good, and to leave this nation better than we found it.

Right. But as Peter Baker adroitly observes, it’s pretty tough to claim to be the agent of change when your party has been in power for the past eight years.

Actually, Digby predicted this some time ago: That Republicans would begin claiming that Bush failed because he wasn’t a “true conservative.” But the stark reality is that – Bush’s timid and eventually short-lived resistance of the GOP’s nativist elements on immigration notwitshstanding – every single policy enacted under the Bush administration was done with not merely the full blessing but the adamant support of movement conservatives.

No doubt about it – John McCain and Sarah Palin would govern differently than George W. Bush and Dick Cheney. They might even govern more competently.

But at the end of the day, their governance will be conservative governance.

We’ve just had nearly eight years of that. And here’s what we’ve gotten:

• Foreign-policy debacles in Iraq and Afghanistan.
• A nation less secure and at greater risk of terrorist attacks than ever.
• A sinking economy.
• An expanding gap between rich and poor.
• Utter inaction on global warming.
• $5-a-gallon gasoline.
• An unresolved immigration problem.
• A debacle in public-school education testing and funding.
• Declining food and consumer-product safety standards.
• A government that spies on its own citizens.
• A government that tortures prisoners held in their detention facilities.

These messes weren’t the result of George W. Bush being too liberal and straying too far from the movement-conservative party line. To the contrary – they’re the direct result of him toeing that line to the millimeter. They are all the direct product of conservative governance.

That will not change if John McCain and Sarah Palin gain the White House. And no matter how much they want us to forget that, well, we can’t. And we won’t.

It started out simply enough: Palin's sister divorces State Trooper Mike Wooten, and it's ugly, with lots of lurid but mostly uncomfirmed accusations against him.  Palin and her minions (including her perhaps-a-little-too-involved husband) lean on Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan to fire Wooten, and then she fires Monegan when he refuses.

Only when the Alaska state legislature starts to investigate does the Cheneyishness really begin.

My favorite moment was when Palin filed an ethics complaint against herself, hoping that an executive branch investigation by the state's Personnel Board would somehow invalidate the legislative investigation.  And, of course, it has the added advantage of enhancing Palin's undeserved reputation as a good-government reformer.

Apparently that didn't work out so well, so the Republican State Rep. from the North Pole(!) petitioned the chair of the legislature's investigation to remove Democratic State Senator Hollis French as the investigation's "project director."  You see, French said that the investigation was "likely to be damaging" and mentioned the possibility of impeachment.  The horror!  The... horror.  (Can we get Mr. French into Congress ASAP, please?)

And then there are the witnesses.  First they agreed to provide depositions voluntarily, so the legislative panel cancelled their August 18 meeting to consider subpoenas.  Then seven of them changed their minds over the past three days (what an amazing coincidence!).  Now subpoenas are not only back on the table, but the legislature has now moved their report date up to October 10th, thus making it that much harder for Team McPalin to stall it beyond Election Day.  Ha ha!

And, finally, there is Sarah Palin herself, who talks a good game about wanting to be open and accountable, but, well...

The legislature's special counsel Steve Branchflower so far has not been able to depose either Palin or her husband, Todd. [Palin's lawyer, Thomas] Van Flein indicated the governor likely will not agree to a deposition unless lawmakers turn the matter over to the Personnel Board.

"Assuming you agree to submit to proper jurisdictional process, we can check the Governor's schedule to see when she and the First Gentleman are available for an interview," Van Flein wrote.

In other words, he'll make Palin available to their investigation... if they agree to drop it.  Beautiful.  This is the same guy who called Branchflower's attempts to contact Palin's husband "a serious security breach that we may be obligated to report to the Secret Service."

Also, as the Anchorage Daily News notes, Palin is not exactly ordering her staff to cooperate with the investigation.

What is it about Republicans and the rule of law?  And when will they realize that the coverup makes them look far more dodgy than the initial crime itself?  And why on Earth would McCain choose a running mate with an unmarried pregnant daughter and a serious ethics investigation hanging over her head?

Just because Republicans don't care about such things (only among their own, of course), doesn't mean the rest of America doesn't.

Here in Missouri, the home of both Harry "Stop the War Profiteers!" Truman and John "I'm a Homeland Security Lobbyist Now" Ashcroft (and also the senator who holds Truman's seat, Claire "Bring Back HST!" McCaskill [pdf]), the elections are fierce up and down the ticket. Traditionally, the big cities of St. Louis and Kansas City come out for the Democrats, the rural areas come out for the GOP, and the elections turn on turnout. Who can get their own folks pumped up to get to the polls, even in the areas dominated by the other party?

This is where the VP choice will have its biggest impact. According to ABC (with emphasis added),

Given the sharp political divisions she inspires, Palin's initial impact on vote preferences and on views of McCain looks like a wash, and, contrary to some prognostication, she does not draw disproportionate support from women. But she could potentially assist McCain by energizing the GOP base, in which her reviews are overwhelmingly positive.

That "energizing the GOP base" is what has grabbed my attention in Missouri. Pollster.com has data on the races for governor and two US House seats here, some of which is both interesting and problematic.

The governor's race between the GOP's US Representative Kenny Hulshof (MO-09) and Democratic state Attorney General Jay Nixon is very complicated. Sitting Governor Matt Blunt, son of US House Minority Whip Mel Roy Blunt (update: oops!), surprised everyone earlier this year when he suddenly announced that he was NOT running for re-election, despite having spent a lot of energy raising money and keeping any challengers at bay. Perhaps the investigations over the destruction of official emails and the firing of one of Blunt's own lawyers who tried to point out how illegal that was had something to do with that decision.

But I digress . . .

Hulshof and his primary opponent both ran very hard to the right to capture the base, with each trying to out-fundy the other, and ended with a very close finish. The loser (who carried most of the state outside of Hulshof's district, neighboring St. Louis, and parts of SE Missouri where Hulshof grew up) conceded gracefully, which brought sighs of relief to the GOP apparatus across the state. Meanwhile, Nixon's been bashing the GOP all over the state as he gears up his campaign. As you can see from the chart at Pollster.com, in May and June, while the primary battles were running, Nixon had a 20-25 point lead on Hulshof, in the "if the pairing in Nov is . . ." polls (not terribly valid, but that's all you can do in primary season), which by mid-August (after the primary but before the Dem convention) had dropped to 6 point lead.

Which leads us to the first of those two US House races -- Hulshof's 9th District seat, which covers blue-leaning Columbia (home to the U of Missouri) , dips south a bit (but skirts the state capitol in Jefferson City), reaches east to the western suburbs of St. Louis, and extends north up to Iowa. Blaine Luetkemeyer (R) was trailing Judy Baker (D) just slightly in July (within the margin of error), but by Sept 1-2 had opened up a 12 point lead.

On the other side of the state in northwest Missouri is the 6th District, which includes the northern Kansas City and it suburbs and goes up to Iowa. GOP incumbent Sam Graves is running against former Kansas City mayor Kay Barnes, and the race here is very close. Graves had a slight 4 point lead in the last poll, taken at the end of July.

It's too soon for any serious polling to try to quantify how much the selection of Palin will bolster the GOP prospects in these three races, but I have no doubts that it has done exactly that. It probably will pull the Governor's race into a tie when the next polls come out, and push the two house races toward the GOP as well.

Whatever happens with the Obama/McCain race, it's in races like these three that Palin will have her biggest effect on the election this November. The rightwing loves her, and in races and districts like these where the GOP is fighting desperately to defend their seats, that TheoCon love may be what keeps them in the GOP column.

But the pushback is under way as well. Just today, the KC Star noted a countermove by Claire McCaskill to bring fellow Senators Jon Tester and Jim Webb to Missouri to campaign on Barnes' behalf. They should both play well in the 9th district.

Of course, that's my guess "if the election were held today." The way the news is going, a lot can change very quickly. But don't underestimate the effect of this nomination. The TheoCons love Palin, and she'll bring them out to vote in ways that McCain alone could only dream of doing, making life more difficult for Democrats like Nixon, Baker, and Barnes in the process. Now, more than ever, we need to put attention on the down ticket races.

Ever heard of this little thing called "Blue America"?

(photo credit: Sam Felder)