What Say You Now, Jo Bonner?

by: mooncat

Wed Jan 27, 2010 at 15:49:57 PM CST

Americans United for Change called on U.S. Rep. Jo Bonner (AL-1) to state publicly whether he believes that conservative activist and now alleged felon James O'Keefe is still deserving of “honor” as an “investigative journalist” and is still “owed a debt of gratitude by the people of the United States” – words of praise expressed in a Congressional resolution co-sponsored by Bonner last October, which he may or may not regret today in light of reports that O’Keefe was arrested by the FBI and charged Tuesday with plotting to tamper with the telephone system in the New Orleans office of Senator Mary Landrieu (D-LA).

Jo Bonner thought James O'Keefe deserved national recognition and praise before the FBI arrested him for allegedly plotting to tamper with the phone lines of a United States Senator. 

Alabamians want to know: Does Jo Bonner regret taking up valuable time in Congress to “honor” Mr. O’Keefe’s special brand of “investigative journalism”  -- which bears a striking similarity to the "ends justify the means" lawlessness of Nixon's Watergate thugs?

Bobby Bright Still Staying a Dem

by: mooncat

Thu Jan 14, 2010 at 10:57:27 AM CST

Rep. Bobby Bright (D, AL-02) is not jumping into a party switch like former fellow Blue Dog Parker Griffith (R, AL-05) -- a leap that may turn out to be from the frying pan into the fire.

Sporting a bright royal-blue tie, Bright told colleagues in the Democrats’ conservative Blue Dog Coalition, “I’m back.”.

Bright’s remark was greeted with applause and “attaboys,” according to Bright.

Bright is a lot more politically savvy than Griffith.  He won the closest Congressional race in the country in 2008, can't spare a single vote if he wants to win reelection in 2010 and knows that switching parties inevitably turns off a lot of voters.  Your old friends can't stand you, your new friends don't want you and the independents say you just proved politicians can't be trusted.

And really, why should Bright switch?  After the initial organizing vote to elect Nancy Pelosi as Speaker, Democratic House leadership has let him vote pretty much as he wants or as will benefit his district.  Could Bright hope for that same freedom as a Republican?  Hell no!  With a much smaller caucus the GOP leadership can't allow any defections from the party line -- Bright has much more freedom as a Democrat.  Griffith did too, but he was too pre-occupied with polls to figure that out.

Republicans Jo Bonner & Spencer Bachus Vote to Allow Importation of Radioactive Waste

by: mooncat

Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 13:20:35 PM CST

From the department of what the heck are these guys thinking? 

Isn't the nasty waste generated in this country -- some of which ends up in Perry County, Alabama -- enough for us to deal with? 

Apparently not for Jo Bonner (R, AL-01) & Spencer Bachus (R, AL-06) who voted against the Radioactive Import Deterrence Act (HR 515) which -- thankfully! -- passed this week.  The official GOP line for voting to accept the gently glowing foreign waste is they "think of it as jobs."  At least they didn't say "good jobs" or "safe jobs."

All three Alabama Democrats -- Artur Davis (D, AL-07), Bobby Bright (BD, AL-02) and Parker Griffith (BD, AL-05) -- voted to keep the radioactive waste out of the United States.  If one of them represents you, you might want to say thanks next time you see him.

There is no free market for health care

by: mooncat

Tue Oct 27, 2009 at 09:43:17 AM CDT

Go read what Briane P said:

Call Jo Bonner at 202-225-4931, and explain to Jo that we don't have a free market for health insurance. A free market assumes that the seller and buyer have a choice, to get something or not get something, or to shop around.

But health care doesn't work that way. If I am having a heart attack, I will be taken to the nearest health care facility, period.

And, health care is not an option in the first place; I can't replace "health care" with something else, the way I can replace "buying a house" with "renting an apartment" or "living at home." I have to have health care, or I'll die young (like Nikki White, who tried to buy health insurance on the "free market," but couldn't, and so she died.)

Kudos for smacking Jo Bonner and the Conservative nonsense he rode in on. 

Jo Bonner Will Ask The CBO to Score Single Payer

by: Hens Teeth

Tue Sep 01, 2009 at 10:54:24 AM CDT

I was at Representative Jo Bonner's town hall meeting in Tillman's Corner, Alabama. My question to Rep. Bonner was:

I would like to start my own business, but I am over 40 & under 65. I can't get affordable health insurance unless I work for a large corporation. Why can't I buy into Medicare?

A single payer, Medicare for All, health plan was taken off the table before the discussion was started, even though a majority of Americans, and a majority of doctors are in favor of it. [shouts from hecklers in the back of the room, so I had to raise my voice here.] My question is, Will you ask the CBO to rate it in comparison to the other proposals so that all of the various proposals can be evaluated objectively?

Jo first told the hecklers to behave themselves, and that I had a valid question.

He then said a lot of words about how great Medicare is, but gave no indication of how it might be expanded to people under 65.

Next, Jo talked about how the Republicans have no power in Washington, because they are in the minority. I told him that he could shame the Democrats into joining his request to score Single Payer.

Then he rambled on about various plans that the CBO has scored, implying that Single Payer was one of them. I repeated that HR676 had not been scored.

Then he mumbled something about trying to request it. So I thanked him, and told him that I looked forward to seeing the report.

War Supplemental Passed, All Alabama Repubs Vote Against Funding Troops

by: mooncat

Fri Jun 19, 2009 at 15:57:06 PM CDT

Whatever happened to "a vote against the Supplemental is a vote to withhold vital support from our troops in the field?"  Apparently Alabama Republicans no longer care about funding for troops in the field since they all voted against the $80 billion in emergency war spending this week.

Alabama's congressional delegation voted along party lines when the House narrowly approved an emergency war-spending bill that provides $80 billion to maintain defense and intelligence activities in Iraq and Afghanistan for the rest of the year.

...

In the Alabama delegation, Democrats Rep. Artur Davis of Birmingham, Bobby Bright of Montgomery and Parker Griffith of Huntsville voted for the emergency spending bill. Votine "no" were Republicans Spencer Bachus of Birmingham, Robert Aderholt of Haleyville, Jo Bonner of Mobile and Mike Rogers of Saks.

This just proves once again that you can't spell hypocrisy without G-O-P.  Trust me, the "G" is hiding in there somewhere.  From The Hill:

For years, Republicans portrayed the bills funding the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan as matters of national security and accused Democrats who voted against them of voting against the troops.

In 2005, Rep. Tom Cole (R-Okla.) went so far as to say sending troops into battle and not paying for it would be an “immoral thing to do.” And just last year, more House Republicans voted for the war supplemental bill than did Democrats, who opposed the legislation because it did little to wind down the military effort in Iraq.

So Alabama Republicans are now doing immoral things -- or things that were immoral just a couple of years ago.  Why am I not surprised?  It's all about political expediency.

Republican Fiscal Responsibility Woes

by: mooncat

Mon Feb 23, 2009 at 07:00:00 AM CST

President Obama is doing away with creative accounting methods for the federal budget:

For his first annual budget next week, President Obama has banned four accounting gimmicks that President George W. Bush used to make deficit projections look smaller. The price of more honest bookkeeping: A budget that is $2.7 trillion deeper in the red over the next decade than it would otherwise appear, according to administration officials.

The new accounting involves spending on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, Medicare reimbursements to physicians and the cost of disaster responses.

$2.7 trillion in off-the-books red ink.  That's a pretty impressive record.  Where were all the "balanced budget" Congressional Republicans while that spending, and the creative accounting to hide it, was going on?  They were happily rubber-stamping every spending bill George W Bush showed them, and with nary a peep about fiscal responsibility.  No less a bastion of liberal thought than the Mobile Press-Register is pointing out the hypocrisy of crying "fiscal irresponsibility" on Obama's Stimulus Package after voting for big spending without objection all through the Bush years.

Time and again this month, Sen. Jeff Sessions of Mobile and other congressional Republicans bashed an ambitious economic stimulus package as an ill-conceived borrowing spree that will leave future generations burdened by debt.

In the view of some analysts, however, those critics were handicapped by a burden of their own: the GOP's record over the past eight years.

Between January 2001, when former President George W. Bush took office, and his departure last month, the national debt almost doubled, spiking from $5.7 trillion to $10.6 trillion, according to U.S. Treasury Department figures.

Republicans controlled Congress during much of that time. And Sessions and other GOP members of the Alabama and Mississippi delegations repeatedly backed both revenue-draining tax cuts and big-ticket spending measures such as the Medicare prescription drug benefit approved in late 2003.

"We can't look back," Sessions said recently when asked about the resulting gusher of red ink. "What happened, happened."

Que sera, sera, huh?  Funny how these characters turned over a new leaf of fiscal responsibility just when we got a new President, isn't it?  Looks more like good old fashioned obstruction for political gain than a sudden awakening of principle.

Misinformation Alert -- Jo Bonner and the Marsh Mouse

by: mooncat

Mon Feb 16, 2009 at 23:09:22 PM CST

It's one thing when the right wing so-called media lie about Nancy Pelosi  and other Democrats--after all, Sean, Drudge, Morning Joe and Faux News are first and foremost entertainment -- but it's pretty sad when Alabama Congressman Jo Bonner parrots the misinformation in his "This Week in Washington" column, a column running in a number of Alabama newspapers that won't bother to fact check the good Congressman.  Doesn't Bonner have at least one staffer capable of using the Google so he can avoid spreading lies far and wide across Alabama?  If not, his column ought to be labeled "fiction" everywhere it runs.

What Bonner wrote:

Littered with billions of dollars in wasteful spending – millions of dollars for the federal government to buy plug-in cars, $30 million to protect San Francisco’s salt marsh harvest mouse, ...

The truth:

"There is no language in the bill that says this money will go to this project," Steel [spokesman for House Minority Leader Boehner and the guy who started this tale] told the San Jose Mercury News. "There are large pots of money in the bill that go to various agencies. One of those agencies said the salt marsh harvest mouse project is something we'd do if you gave us the money."

Pelosi spokesman Drew Hamill agreed that funding for the mouse is not in the bill, and said she did not lobby for it to be on any list.

Then where did the $30 million figure come from, if it's not in the bill? It turns out that $30 million is the total amount that the California Coastal Conservancy, a state agency, recommended more than a month ago to numerous federal agencies, looking for lists of "shovel ready" projects as part of the stimulus bill planning.

The US Economy is in a severe recession, Americans are losing jobs at a near record rate, there is serious talk of nationalizing banks and Jo Bonner is worried about San Francisco mice?  How irrelevant can you get? No wonder the Republicans have been reduced to a rump party.  Even that is probably more than they deserve.

A break from basking in the afterglow of November 4th

by: herding old cats

Wed Nov 19, 2008 at 22:56:12 PM CST

If you're tired of the Obama cabinet sweepstakes, or trying to game the last couple of Senate races, try this:

Alabama will elect an all-new governor in 2010.  Bob Riley is term-limited.  So what does the Republican field look like?

Republicans rumored to be considering a run include Bradley Byrne (current head of the two year college system), Kay Ivey (State Treasurer), and Jack Hawkins (chancellor of Troy State University).  The only Republican actually planning to run is Tim James (son of Fob James, former governor).  So there is one confirmed and three previously rumored.  To which, the Mobile Press-Register wishes to add, as another rumored candidate - Jo Bonner!

 Now, Jo Bonner just won re-election to the U.S. House of Representatives, for his fourth term, with no opposition (he had opposition to start with, but a scandal took out the opponent).  So why would he contemplate a gubernatorial run?

Well, it's not too fun to be in the minority party in the House, but Bonner knew that would be the case when he ran, if he was realistic with himself.  The Press-Register story also mentions that he has school-age kids and that the separation is a burden - a real problem for a conscientious father, which Bonner no doubt is, but once again, he knew about that when he ran for re-election.  This brings us to the third reason: The Press-Register says so.  Follow me below the fold:

Next Time… (Part 3)

by: robertsullivan1973

Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 14:25:43 PM CST

Next Time… (Part 2)

by: robertsullivan1973

Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 10:00:35 AM CST

Why Democrats Need a Challenger in Every Race

by: mooncat

Mon Aug 18, 2008 at 22:31:19 PM CDT

It should be obvious -- never give the opposition a pass -- but Democrats are still giving too many Republicans a free ride to reelection.  But, you say, there's just no way any Democrat in the pipeline would stand much chance against Jo Bonner in AL-01 or Spencer Bachus in AL-06.  So what?  Winning isn't always the point.

If Spencer Bachus had an opponent this year, I doubt he'd be going to Aspen for a retreat at a McCain fundraiser's posh place, hobnobbing with August Busch III and Sheldon Adelson, 12th richest man in the world and founder of Freedom's Watch -- nice name for a smarmy organization, that.

The list of McCain’s “Trailblazers” and “Innovators” includes Carly Fiorina, former CEO of Hewlett-Packard and a senior McCain adviser; August A. Busch III of the Anheuser Busch Co.; Fred Smith, CEO of FedEx; and Ted Forstmann of Forstmann, Little & Co., which frequently holds conferences in Aspen.

Also included on the fundraisers list are Las Vegas moguls Stephen Wynn, CEO of Mirage Resorts Inc., and Sheldon Adelson, CEO of Las Vegas Sands Corp.

Politicians on the list include Utah Governor Jon Hunstman, Rep. Spencer Bachus (R-AL), Rep. Joe Barton (R-TX), Rep. Eric Cantor (R-VA), and former Sens. Alfonse D’Amato and Phil Gramm....

Several of McCain’s top campaign aides — Charlie Black, Rick Davis and Steve Schmidt — are also expected to come to Aspen.

And if the Alabama Democratic Party had recruited someone, anyone to run against Jo Bonner in AL-01, there's no way Bonner would funnel money to Dave Reichert (R-Boeing) in the state of Washington. 

Reichert has received money before from both sides in the tanker fight. Boeing’s political action committee donated $7,000 to his campaign, and Rep. Jo Bonner (R-Ala.), who represents Mobile, kicked in $1,000, according to Federal Election Commission records.

You may remember that netroots candidate Darcy Burner is running against Reichert and it's expected to be a very close race.  If we had tied Bonner down here, he wouldn't be helping her opponent in Washington.

Look at the big picture, y'all.  Field a candidate in every race, from dogcatcher on up.  It builds our bench and keeps the opposition honest. 

Jo Bonner: Figures Don't Lie ...

by: mooncat

Fri Aug 15, 2008 at 14:12:32 PM CDT

But liars do figure.  In Atmore for a town-hall meeting, Congressman Jo Bonner said:

“The problem with social security is that it used to be for every 55 people putting money into it there was one taking out and now it seems that for every two people there is one taking it out,” Bonner said. “The government is afraid to try and fix any of the problems with social security because they are afraid they will step on people’s toes no matter how they attempt to make the change.”

Sounds like that change from 55 to 2 workers per beneficiary happened in recent memory, huh?  In fact, even though Bonner was careful to say "seems," it sounds like there are already only 2 workers for every  Social Security beneficiary.  Well, it seems like Jo Bonner exaggerated the problem just a trifle.

At some point the ratio must have been as high as 55 to1 -- heck, when the first person retired it was everybody except him working for his benefit, I guess -- and the ratio may drop to 2 in the future, but Bonner is stretching the truth from both ends in his statement above.  For a more straight discussion of Social Security, read Protecting Social Security's Beneficiaries by Nancy Altman.  Here's a couple of paragraphs as a teaser.

The worker-to-beneficiary ratio, which compares the number of workers contributing to Social Security to the number of people drawing Social Security benefits, reveals virtually nothing about the affordability of Social Security, because it sheds no light on how productive those workers are or on whether other burdens on those workers are increasing or decreasing.¹⁴ The projected reduction in the ratio from 3-to-1 to 2-to-1, which results from the aging of the population, merely indicates that, if Social Security were to be funded solely—which it now is not¹⁵ —from a tax on wages, that tax would have to increase. The shift in the ratio demonstrates, in a rough way, that Social Security will cost more in the future, but it is silent with respect to the affordability of those higher costs, and, even more important, fails to reveal that those higher costs were addressed decades ago, as discussed below.

A better measure of Social Security’s cost and affordability is the percentage of gross domestic product (GDP) the program consumes. Unlike dependency ratio measures,¹⁶ which simply reflect age distributions, and when more refined, work status, GDP focuses on the productivity of the nation as a whole. When the cost of Social Security is examined in terms of GDP, it becomes unquestionably obvious that our economy can support our elderly, the widespread demographic anxiety notwithstanding.

Why are these partisan issues?

by: mooncat

Thu Jun 12, 2008 at 14:08:52 PM CDT

Are unemployment and efficient transportation really partisan issues?  It's good to watch how our representatives are "representing" us in Washington, and since there's precious little reporting in the press of their actual votes, so we try to highlight some of them here.  All too often, the Alabama delegation splits along party lines.  

#1:  Is extending unemployment benefits really a partisan issue?  Just look at the map of unemployment rates in Alabama.  You don't see full employment in Republican districts and high unemployment only in Democratic ones.  Today House Democrats are trying to pass an extension of unemployment benefits.

The Labor Department reported Thursday that first-time filings for unemployment benefits spiked upward in the latest week, hitting the highest level since late March, as the number of continuing jobless claims reached the highest level since early 2004.

The unemployment bill failed by three votes yesterday, in the face of Republican opposition.  All Alabama Republicans except Mike Rogers (R, AL-03) voted against it.  After yesterday's vote, DCCC Chairman Chris Van Hollen released the following statement:

"House Republican efforts to defend the status quo and protect George Bush's and John McCain's failed economic polices have reached a new low. Less than one week after the largest one-month jump in America's unemployment rate in two decades, House Republicans blocked passage of a bill to extend unemployment insurance to workers, who are struggling to find a new job in this slowing economy.  

"This is a firm reminder that Republicans are absolutely comfortable with the status quo and are completely out of touch with the harsh economic realities facing American workers."

There is higher than average unemployment in Jo Bonner's district and in Terry Everett's and they voted "NO," so it isn't just a case of looking out for their own district and ignoring everyone else.  What are they thinking?

 #2: Why is efficient transportation a partisan issue?

What do Republicans in Congress have against efficiency? They’ve recently voted against efficient public schools, against efficient light bulbs, and against efficient crane conservation. Now, Republicans in Congress are trying to destroy legislation that would promote efficient transportation.

These are the Alabama Congressmen (all Republicans) who voted against the efficient transportation bill. 

Robert Aderholt
Spencer Bachus
Jo Bonner
Terry Everett
Mike Rogers

Reducing demand for fossil fuels is a key part of reducing our dependence on imported oil.  These guys need to know more about energy independence than just "let's drill in the Alaska Wildlife Refuge."

Call to action:  If you are "represented" by one of these Repubs, please give him a call or email and ask him to really REPRESENT your views.

Fear and Loathing in AL-01; Boyd's -eye View

by: piggieheart

Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 11:23:09 AM CDT

I read a letter of withdrawal today from Tommy Fuller, dropping out of the AL-01 race for Congress.  I have also been in touch with State Chairman Joe Turnham, who is working very hard to field a slate of candidates who are not only competitive, but also ideologically acceptable to Democratic voters.

My take on the Fuller situation is that, either: 1) he was recruited as a stalking horse to hold the seat until a new candidate can be found and then withdraw, or 2) the questions about his affiliations became a problem. In any event, my bottom line is that this Congressional seat must not be passively abandoned to Jo Bonner.

Conservatism Has "Failed Miserably" for Alabamians

by: mooncat

Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 20:14:08 PM CDT

The Anniston Star had an excellent editorial this week -- as they often do --offering some advice for Alabama's incumbent Republicans before they face the voters in November:

Put aside your rigid ideology/party loyalty and promote a more progressive future for your state and the nation.

Of course, the Star's editors weren't born yesterday and don't actually expect the Republicans to follow their advice and embrace progressivism, no matter how smart that would be:

As they have in the past, Alabama's GOP congressmen will quite likely campaign this fall on their conservative bona fides, bragging on their desire for small government and low taxes.

While an excellent electoral political strategy, it has failed miserably as a method of leading Alabamians.

In a contradiction, these conservative congressmen have overseen the massive growth of the government, with budgets going up and government's power to intrude on the lives of citizens rising as well.

Really, go read this editoral.  Do it now.  We'll still be here when you get back.  The piece lays out the failures of incumbent Republicans in unusual detail:

• Rubber-stamped Bush's disastrous Iraq policies
• Intervened in a family decision re: Terri Schiavo
• Failed to achieve rational immigration reform
• Chipped away at Constitutional Rights such as habeas corpus
• Supported Bush's warrantless wiretapping program to spy on American citizens
  
• Opposed a new and improved GI Bill sponsored by Sen. Jim Webb, D-Va.
• Resisted improving health care for children in the form of S-CHIP
• Voted against the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2007
• Refused to consider equitable tax policies, thereby "heaping a huge financial burden on the shoulders of America's next generation"
• Brought back a remarkable $1.71 in federal money for every $1 Alabama pays in federal taxes. Pork, anyone?
  
• Tolerated the botched federal response to hurricane Katrina.

The Anniston Star is not alone in pointing out the failure of conservatism.  Recently Newt Gingrich said "The Republican brand has been so badly damaged that if Republicans try to run an anti-Obama, anti- Reverend Wright, or (if Senator Clinton wins), anti-Clinton campaign, they are simply going to fail"; NRCC chair Tom Cole (R, OK) said the problem is not the Republican campaign strategy, but the party itself; and Rep. Tom Davis (R, VA) said of his party, "if we were dog food, they would take us off the shelf."  Former Republican Congressman Mickey Edwards -- he used to represent my sister's district in Oklahoma and is very conservative -- says Republicans have only themselves to blame:

Republican members of Congress are in trouble because they deserve to be. Because they yawned when a Republican president declared that he was free to disobey the law. Because they walked out of the House chambers rather than vote to enforce congressional subpoenas of administration officials. Because they acted like White House staff rather than as members of a separate and equal branch of government.

Will Alabama Republicans (Jeff Sessions (Sen.), Jo Bonner (AL-01),Mike Rogers (AL-03), Robert Aderholt (AL-04) and Spencer Bachus (AL-06), not to mention the Republican nominees in AL-02 and AL-05) do the smart thing and actually change their conservative spots between now and November?  I doubt it.  Conservative Republicans specialize in denying reality -- they've been doing it since they got elected.  Fortunately, voters seem to have caught on to their scam.

The New GI Bill, Supporting the Troops for Real

by: mooncat

Fri May 16, 2008 at 08:12:11 AM CDT

The next post down is a statement from 4th District candidate Greg Warren taking incumbent Robert Aderholt to task for voting against the New GI Bill yesterday. 

Representative Aderholt, who has never served a single day in uniform for our country, shows his lack of support for our hardworking military personnel by his vote in opposition of the New GI Bill. This is just another example of Representative Aderholt turning his back on the hardworking citizens of his own district and the nation. As a U. S. Navy veteran, I understand the need to stand behind and support our wonderful men and women in uniform.

Of course, Aderholt was not the only Alabama Republican to vote "NO" on the benefit package for returning veterans.  In their usual lockstep fashion, ALL THE ALABAMA REPUBLICANS VOTED AGAINST IT.  Although 32 Republicans voted in favor of the measure, Spencer Bachus, Jo Bonner, Terry Everett and Mike Rogers joined Robert Aderholt in voting against expanded educational benefits for veterans.

Here's what Paul Rieckoff says about this vote:

This afternoon, the House of Representatives made history. By an overwhelming margin, lawmakers passed the landmark new GI Bill which will make college affordable to the more than 1.6 million Iraq and Afghanistan veterans.

As President Roosevelt said when he signed the original GI Bill for veterans of World War II,

"[The GI Bill] gives emphatic notice to the men and women in our armed forces that the American people do not intend to let them down."

The House of Representatives renewed that promise. This is a tremendous and bipartisan commitment to our troops. We've seen enough bumper sticker and lapel pin patriotism; today, we saw the real thing.

Bumper sticker and lapel pin patriotism ... we've let our Representatives get by with that for too darned long.  It's time for a change.  Let's send some real patriots to Washington in November, like Greg Warren in AL-04 and his counterparts in Alabama's 1st, 2nd and 3rd districts, too.

* Rieckhoff is a veteran of Operation Iraqi Freedom and the Executive Director and Founder of IAVA (Iraq & Afghanistan Veterans of America) -- he knows what real patriotism looks like from the inside.

Republicans - They Voted For Motherhood Before They Voted Against It.

by: mooncat

Sat May 10, 2008 at 23:45:34 PM CDT

The House Republicans have taken leave of their senses -- and I mean totally lost it. From Dana Milbank in the Washington Post:

It was already shaping up to be a difficult year for congressional Republicans. Now, on the cusp of Mother's Day, comes this: A majority of the House GOP has voted against motherhood.

On Wednesday afternoon, the House had just voted, 412 to 0, to pass H. Res. 1113, "Celebrating the role of mothers in the United States and supporting the goals and ideals of Mother's Day," when Rep. Todd Tiahrt (R-Kan.), rose in protest.

"Mr. Speaker, I move to reconsider the vote," he announced.

Rep. Kathy Castor (D-Fla.), who has two young daughters, moved to table Tiahrt's request, setting up a revote. This time, 178 Republicans cast their votes against mothers.

It has long been the custom to compare a popular piece of legislation to motherhood and apple pie. Evidently, that is no longer the standard. Worse, Republicans are now confronted with a John Kerry-esque predicament: They actually voted for motherhood before they voted against it.

Republicans, unhappy with the Democratic majority, have been using such procedural tactics as this all week to bring the House to a standstill, but the assault on mothers may have gone too far. House Minority Leader John Boehner, asked yesterday to explain why he and 177 of his colleagues switched their votes, answered: "Oh, we just wanted to make sure that everyone was on record in support of Mother's Day."

By voting against it?

And how did Alabama's "family values" Republican Congressmen vote?  NO.  Every single one of them -- Robert Aderholt, Spencer Bachus, Jo Bonner, Terry Everett and Mike Rogers -- voted "NO."  Humbug on Mother's Day, from the GOP to you.

Let's be absolutely clear, they all initially voted in favor of the Motherhood resolution, but immediately turned around and voted to undo the original vote.  That manuever is known as a "flip-flop" when a Democrat does it.  It is usually completely ignored when Republicans do it.  Partisan feeling is high in Congress these days but something is seriously wrong with Republican priorities when they play political games with a resolution commending mothers and Mother's Day.  Will it be baseball and apple pie next?

Happy Mother's Day and many thanks to all the mothers and grandmothers out there from the folks at Left in Alabama and from Congressmen Bud Cramer and Artur Davis who are apparently the only members of Alabama's Congressional delegation with the good sense to appreciate Motherhood.

Hope lives in AL-01; Boyd's-eye View

by: piggieheart

Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 08:55:30 AM CDT

On the final day for candidate filing, Thomas E. Fuller, County Democratic Chair of Washington County was announced as our party's candidate for the First District Congressional seat, opposing Jo Bonner, Repugnican incumbent and Bush-bot. Many of us had questions about Mr. Fuller's credentials as a "real Democrat", due in part to certain of his affiliations.  I wrote Mr. Fuller an email, asking for some assurances on issues important to me and - I suspect- to all of you.

I have recently received a response from the candidate, replying to my questions and including an invitation to an introductory event this weekup in Chatom.  Please read on, as I think you will be pleased with the tenor of his remarks. 

AL-01- Do we have a challenger?

by: piggieheart

Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 13:35:48 PM CDT

It appears that a challenger has appeared to contest the Congressional seat in Alabama-01. The name of Thomas E. Fuller of Chatom, in Washington County, has appeared on the Alabama Democratic Party's official Current Candidates List.

STOP THE PRESSES!! (Sorry, but I have always wanted to say that). As I was writing this, Mr. Fuller called me to confirm that he is indeed a candidate and is planning to make an energetic and serious race. Needless to say, I intend to assist him - assuming that his positions are palatable- and I will keep all of you abreast of what is happening in the campaign.  Ya--hoo! and Yip-pee!