To be fair I wouldn't be at all surprised to find out he voted for Obama in 2008, and he's probably somewhere between Olympia Snowe and Linc Chaffee on the ideological scale. He has a doctorate in education and was an EPA guy under Reagan then left that to run the Department of Environmental Protection under Kean. It's just he has a public record of being a Republican that the Dems can use if they feel he's hurting their guy too much.

dajafi wrote:Thanks, didn't know about his back story.

I wonder if there's any truly popular politician in New Jersey. Maybe Codey, on my Backup QB Principle. (He's forever AJ Feeley in 2003, one could say.)

I think Rush Holt is pretty popular in his district, and I would imagine Chris Smith is as well. Otherwise, how could they keep getting re-elected when their policy positions are somewhat outside the mainstream of their districts?

jerseyhoya wrote:To be fair I wouldn't be at all surprised to find out he voted for Obama in 2008, and he's probably somewhere between Olympia Snowe and Linc Chaffee on the ideological scale. He has a doctorate in education and was an EPA guy under Reagan then left that to run the Department of Environmental Protection under Kean. It's just he has a public record of being a Republican that the Dems can use if they feel he's hurting their guy too much.

NJ--the last stand of the Country Club Republicans.

The time is right for them to make a comeback. Heck, I might consider joining up--I've got the breeding for it. Maybe we'll let the Irish in this time.

Woody wrote:^ is that pacino?

in no way does that kid look like me

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/14/us/14memphis.html

This is going to happen every two years to Rep. Cohen. It's absolutely appalling that this crap still flies.

jerseyhoya wrote:http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/14/us/14memphis.html

This is going to happen every two years to Rep. Cohen. It's absolutely appalling that this crap still flies.

Step back from this particular fraught racial situation & think about reapportionment generally. Election districts are explicitly designed to produce specific, safe results, for ---"somebody who looks like somebody".

It's appalling that a lot of crap concerning the drawing of districts flies, or has ever flown.

The best, and I mean most astounding, part of that Cohen story is the quote from Herenton's campaign manager:

"“This seat was set aside for people who look like me,” said Mr. Herenton’s campaign manager, Sidney Chism, a black county commissioner. “It wasn’t set aside for a Jew or a Christian. It was set aside so that blacks could have representation.”

That's a nice touch, adding "...or a Christian," to save it from being outright anti-Semitism. The whole thing is ridiculous, of course.


In other news, the guy who threw his shoes at President Bush is out of prison, and what do you know, he claims he was tortured and now fears for his life.

dajafi wrote:Thanks, didn't know about his back story.

I wonder if there's any truly popular politician in New Jersey. Maybe Codey, on my Backup QB Principle. (He's forever AJ Feeley in 2003, one could say.)

I'm not sure the words "popular" and "politician" can legally be used together in NJ. Here is another article regarding Daggett:

http://www.politickernj.com/alan-steinb ... -nonfactor

The rent is too damn high!

pacino wrote:

Woody wrote:^ is that pacino?

in no way does that kid look like me

oh you! *pinches pacino's cherubic cheeks*

Well, Kanye may think Bush doesn't care about black people, but Obama doesn't care too much for Kanye either.

drsmooth wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/14/us/14memphis.html

This is going to happen every two years to Rep. Cohen. It's absolutely appalling that this crap still flies.

Step back from this particular fraught racial situation & think about reapportionment generally. Election districts are explicitly designed to produce specific, safe results, for ---"somebody who looks like somebody".

It's appalling that a lot of crap concerning the drawing of districts flies, or has ever flown.

This is true.

Honestly (and I've probably ranted about this before) I think the concept of majority minority districts are detrimental to the long term cause of black politicians in general.

Districts that are drawn with D+20 or D+30 Cook PVIs are not set up to elect the type of moderate politicians who can attract the bipartisan support necessary to win in most states. Also, the type of coalition building that it takes to win and hold a seat in Congress where the only tough part is keeping the Dem nomination is much different from the efforts to win a statewide race (outside of Massachusetts). Once the typical black congressman gets elected to their seats, it seems they stay there till they die. There are upsides to this I guess, as many of the House Dem chairman are black guys who have been in the House forever, but there's no upward mobility for them from there. There are rare exceptions to this, like Harold Ford Jr. who is unfortunate to be from such a conservative state, but I don't think it's a surprise you don't see too many of the black congressmen from the Northeast or Midwest as successful statewide candidates, and I don't think racism is a good answer for why that's the case. The few black statewide elected officials we've seen (Obama, Patrick, Moseley Braun, Wilder) haven't been members of Congress.

Also districts that are drawn so favorably to elect a black Democrat are so safe for the incumbent that they can be barking mad or even a criminal and get reelected aren't helpful to the goals of getting more blacks elected to the upper chamber or improving Joe America's perception of black politicians either. That William Jefferson could get reelected and even have the CBC go to bat for him to keep his seat on Ways and Means was pretty embarrassing. Last weekend I was watching NY local news and they had this Charlie Rangel press conference on that was cringeworthy in its they're trying to bring him down-ness (they=white people, of course).

Of course these phenomenon aren't limited to majority minority districts or Democrats. We have some ridiculous districts out there (though to be fair some of them are called "Wyoming" and "Alaska"), and manage to elect some nutters who get safely reelected despite the embarrassment they cause (Bachmann, Schmidt, probably Mr. Wilson). But the plight of the dumb white conservative isn't federally protected by drawing specific districts.

If you have 10 minutes watch this and get a glimpse in to how stupid our country is.

<object width="560" height="340"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/lUPMjC9mq5Y&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/lUPMjC9mq5Y&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="340"></embed></object>

Obama's own history confirms a lot of what jh says above.

As probably most of you know, he ran for Congress in 2000 against Bobby Rush, a former Black Panther, and got absolutely stomped. The voters of that district found him too cerebral, too moderate... I don't feel particularly racist in just baldly saying "too white." And the truth is that this was probably the best possible thing for Obama: if he'd won that race, he would have represented a district out of sync with his own political tendencies, and that affiliation probably would have marginalized him beyond statewide, let alone national consideration.

I guess it's easy for me as a white guy to say that those districts are bad for both minority communities in particular and democracy in general, but that's what I think.

jerseyhoya wrote:Honestly (and I've probably ranted about this before) I think the concept of majority minority districts are detrimental to the long term cause of black politicians in general.

Districts that are drawn with D+20 or D+30 Cook PVIs are not set up to elect the type of moderate politicians who can attract the bipartisan support necessary to win in most states. Also, the type of coalition building that it takes to win and hold a seat in Congress where the only tough part is keeping the Dem nomination is much different from the efforts to win a statewide race (outside of Massachusetts).

okay....

Once the typical black congressman gets elected to their seats, it seems they stay there till they die. There are upsides to this I guess, as many of the House Dem chairman are black guys who have been in the House forever, but there's no upward mobility for them from there. There are rare exceptions to this, like Harold Ford Jr. who is unfortunate to be from such a conservative state, but I don't think it's a surprise you don't see too many of the black congressmen from the Northeast or Midwest as successful statewide candidates, and I don't think racism is a good answer for why that's the case. The few black statewide elected officials we've seen (Obama, Patrick, Moseley Braun, Wilder) haven't been members of Congress.

Also districts that are drawn so favorably to elect a black Democrat are so safe for the incumbent that they can be barking mad or even a criminal and get reelected aren't helpful to the goals of getting more blacks elected to the upper chamber or improving Joe America's perception of black politicians either. That William Jefferson could get reelected and even have the CBC go to bat for him to keep his seat on Ways and Means was pretty embarrassing. Last weekend I was watching NY local news and they had this Charlie Rangel press conference on that was cringeworthy in its they're trying to bring him down-ness (they=white people, of course).

Of course these phenomenon aren't limited to majority minority districts or Democrats. We have some ridiculous districts out there (though to be fair some of them are called "Wyoming" and "Alaska"), and manage to elect some nutters who get safely reelected despite the embarrassment they cause (Bachmann, Schmidt, probably Mr. Wilson). But the plight of the dumb white conservative isn't federally protected by drawing specific districts.

Wait.

Are you suggesting that the drawing up of election district boundaries to practically ensure lifetime employment for a congressional officeholder is ONLY about race, has only arisen to favor African-American politicians?

Because that's ridiculous.

low content, but it's only 13 seconds:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VxKIcrDsJAs[/youtube]

drsmooth wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:Honestly (and I've probably ranted about this before) I think the concept of majority minority districts are detrimental to the long term cause of black politicians in general.

Districts that are drawn with D+20 or D+30 Cook PVIs are not set up to elect the type of moderate politicians who can attract the bipartisan support necessary to win in most states. Also, the type of coalition building that it takes to win and hold a seat in Congress where the only tough part is keeping the Dem nomination is much different from the efforts to win a statewide race (outside of Massachusetts).

okay....

Once the typical black congressman gets elected to their seats, it seems they stay there till they die. There are upsides to this I guess, as many of the House Dem chairman are black guys who have been in the House forever, but there's no upward mobility for them from there. There are rare exceptions to this, like Harold Ford Jr. who is unfortunate to be from such a conservative state, but I don't think it's a surprise you don't see too many of the black congressmen from the Northeast or Midwest as successful statewide candidates, and I don't think racism is a good answer for why that's the case. The few black statewide elected officials we've seen (Obama, Patrick, Moseley Braun, Wilder) haven't been members of Congress.

Also districts that are drawn so favorably to elect a black Democrat are so safe for the incumbent that they can be barking mad or even a criminal and get reelected aren't helpful to the goals of getting more blacks elected to the upper chamber or improving Joe America's perception of black politicians either. That William Jefferson could get reelected and even have the CBC go to bat for him to keep his seat on Ways and Means was pretty embarrassing. Last weekend I was watching NY local news and they had this Charlie Rangel press conference on that was cringeworthy in its they're trying to bring him down-ness (they=white people, of course).

Of course these phenomenon aren't limited to majority minority districts or Democrats. We have some ridiculous districts out there (though to be fair some of them are called "Wyoming" and "Alaska"), and manage to elect some nutters who get safely reelected despite the embarrassment they cause (Bachmann, Schmidt, probably Mr. Wilson). But the plight of the dumb white conservative isn't federally protected by drawing specific districts.

Wait.

Are you suggesting that the drawing up of election district boundaries to practically ensure lifetime employment for a congressional officeholder is ONLY about race, has only arisen to favor African-American politicians?

Because that's ridiculous.

I don't think what I said was ridiculous at all. The Voting Rights Act has been interpreted by the Supreme Court and various DOJ's since the 1960s as requiring majority minority districts to be drawn and states' redistricting plans have to receive DOJ approval in part to see that they have fulfilled this requirement. So that seems pretty clearly about race. Recently it has come to "protect" Hispanics as well, but it started out as a black thing.

He was the worst president in our history, but I have to admit Bush had some pretty okay lines:

The president didn’t think much of Joe Biden either. “Dana, did you tell them my line?” the president once asked with a smile on his face.

“No, Mr. President,” Dana replied hesitantly. “I didn’t.”

He paused for a minute. I could see him thinking maybe he shouldn’t say it, but he couldn’t resist. “If [BS] was currency,” he said straight-faced, “Joe Biden would be a billionaire.” Everyone in the room burst out laughing.
...
I was about to be engulfed by a tidal wave of Palin euphoria when someone—someone I didn’t expect—planted my feet back on the ground. After Palin’s selection was announced, the same people who demanded I acknowledge the brilliance of McCain’s choice expected the president to join them in their high-fiving tizzy. It was clear, though, that the president, ever the skilled politician, had concerns about the choice of Palin, which he called “interesting.” That was the equivalent of calling a fireworks display “satisfactory.”

“I’m trying to remember if I’ve met her before. I’m sure I must have.” His eyes twinkled, then he asked, “What is she, the governor of Guam?”

Everyone in the room seemed to look at him in horror, their mouths agape. When Ed told him that conservatives were greeting the choice enthusiastically, he replied, “Look, I’m a team player, I’m on board.” He thought about it for a minute. “She’s interesting,” he said again. “You know, just wait a few days until the bloom is off the rose.” Then he made a very smart assessment.

“This woman is being put into a position she is not even remotely prepared for,” he said. “She hasn’t spent one day on the national level. Neither has her family. Let’s wait and see how she looks five days out.” It was a rare dose of reality in a White House that liked to believe every decision was great, every Republican was a genius, and McCain was the hope of the world because, well, because he chose to be a member of our party.

Majority-minority districts have been a boon to Republicans in many Southern states. One reason probably why Dems have a stranglehold on the Arkansas delegation to the House is the fact that the state is too small to have a minority-majority Congressional district.

nevermind