Showing posts with label Speier. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Speier. Show all posts

Friday, April 11, 2008

SPEIER SPLASH HYPE

After her swearing-in yesterday, California Congressional District 12 term filler-outer Jackie Speier made a few comments which a sycophantic SFGate reported as a “fiery speech,” supposedly against the war, that caused “some” Republicans to “boo and walk out of the house chamber.”

Some interpret this as a hopeful sign. I have to admit it’s preferable that my congressperson receive Republicans’ boos rather than their cheers.



Is it time for me to soften my skepticism? I looked at the Congressional Record.

The war-related parts of Speier’s comments were quoted in the SFGate article in their entirety. It wasn’t a long speech against the war: here’s all she said about the war, per the Congressional Record:

While holding over 60 community meetings across my district this year, the most common question was, ``When will we get out of Iraq?'' It was asked by voters across the spectrum: veterans, students, parents, the prosperous, middle class, those still working towards their piece of the American Dream.

The process to bring the troops home must begin immediately. The President wants to stay the course, and a man who wants to replace him suggests we could be in Iraq for a hundred years.

But, Madam Speaker, history will not judge us kindly if we sacrifice four generations of Americans because of the folly of one.

Here is a summary of Speier’s points following by my comments in italics:

1. Her constituents position: “When will we get out…?”
This is a weak representation. I bet her constituents position is closer to “immediate, complete, unconditional withdrawal,” not some wimpy quizzicalness.

2. The process of withdrawing troops must begin now.
It already has begun. The only question is, “When will it be completed?” Hillary and Barack are talking about 2010. My suggestion—all troops out by April ’09.

3. Bush has the wrong position.
Cheap shot, not appropriate for a non-partisan swearing-in ceremony.

4. McCain wants a 100-year war.
See #3.

5. We must get out of Iraq in less than 100 years.
Duh!

The congressional Democrats’ position on the war is essentially that of Pontius Pilate: innocence for the evil that happens on their watch. Speier’s gonna be a good, loyal democrat.

----- o -----

Monday, April 07, 2008

NOT SO FAST, JACKIE!

As a long suffering resident of California’s Twelfth Congressional District, I get to vote tomorrow to replace dead Democratic hack, Tom Lantos. Mr Lantos had a compelling concentration camp story and a reliable party-line vote.

Jackie Speier, famous for getting shot in the jungle and for being a good looking woman, is assumed to be Lantos’ replacement-for-life.

She is so confident that she hasn’t even asked for my vote. No mailer. No tv ads. Nothing.

Being a reliable Democratic Party hack is not qualification enough for me. I assume she's Pelosi-lite: pro war, pro torture, anti-impeachment.

I’m voting for the Green Party candidate, Barry Hermanson. At least he sent me a mailer asking for my vote.



White guy, about my age. Actually we look sort of alike.

Go Barry. His website here.

The Voter Information Pamphlet for this election has all the boilerplate of a major election, but content specific to this race consists of a Letter from the John Arntz, Director of SF Board of Elections, and a barebones sample ballot.

Arntz explains the open primary: Candidates from all parties appear on one ballot. If a candidate receives a majority of votes cast (50%+1), he or she wins. If not, there will be a runoff election between the top vote-getters from each party. This runoff will be part of the June 3, 2008 primary ballot.

Note: Tomorrow’s vote is to fill the remainder of Lantos’ term, ending January, 2009 (next January).

To make things complicated, the June 3 ballot will also contain a primary election for the term beginning Jan. ’09 ending Jan’11.

Both could appear on the same ballot.

The voter pamphlet contains no information on the candidates, other than what appears on the sample ballot (below).


I expect at least “Candidate Statements” and lists of endorsers. This seems strange, kind of makeitupaswegoalong.

As you see, there are three parties on the ballot. If there is a runoff, Barry Hermanson will automatically be on it, as the top vote getter in the Green Party. I wonder if Barry would be on the runoff ballot even if he had received zero votes in this election.

Anyway, that won’t happen, because I’m voting for Barry Hermanson, even if he forgets.



----- o -----