Here's Jay Love's latest ad, featuring the retiring Rep. Terry Everett, the face of the past.
Transcript:
I'm Terry Everett. In Washington the choices we make matter and teams we choose matter most.
Nancy Pelosi and Barack Obama are financing Bobby Bright's campaign and they expect something in return.
Bobby's running on a ticket with Barack Obama. We can't afford a congressman beholden to the Liberals who like high taxes and hate our conservative values. Join me in supporting Jay Love, a real conservative.
I'm Jay Love and I approved this message.
Jay Love approves of the same old same old -- divisive partisan politics. As a liberal, I would like to tell Jay and Terry that, unlike conservatives, liberals tend not to be haters. I'm tired of Rush and Sean and now Terry telling me what liberals hate. We don't hate America, we don't hate freedom, we don't hate families or motherhood or working people. If you want the straight story of how Democrats feel about something, ask a Democrat, not a Republican.
Terry Everett's support may prove more of an embarrassment than a boost to Republican Jay Love's election hopes. Last weekend NYT columnist Maureen Dowd pointed out that Everett's remark opens the door to unpleasant questions about John McCain:
The Kerry Swift-boat attacks in 2004 struck down the off-limits signs that were traditionally on a candidate’s military service. Many Democrats are willing to repay the favor, and Republicans clearly no longer see war medals as sacrosanct.
In a radio interview last week, Representative Terry Everett, an Alabama Republican, let loose with a barrage at the Democrat John Murtha, a decorated Vietnam War veteran who is the head of the House defense appropriations subcommittee, calling him “cut-and-run John Murtha” and an “idiot.”
“And don’t talk to me about him being an ex-marine,” Everett said. “Lord, that was 40 years ago. A lot of stuff can happen in 40 years.”
The real danger to the McCain crew in overusing the P.O.W. line so much that it’s a punch line is that it will give Obama an opening for critical questions:
While McCain’s experience was heroic, did it create a worldview incapable of anticipating the limits to U.S. military power in Iraq? Did he fail to absorb the lessons of Vietnam, so that he is doomed to always want to refight it? Did his captivity inform a search-and-destroy, shoot-first-ask-questions-later, “We are all Georgians,” mentality?
Presumably Everett supports McCain, but is just suffering from foot in mouth syndrome and didn't really mean to raise those uncomfortable questions. Today the Dothan Eagle, in the heart of the 2nd District, editorializes about Everett's remarks:
That Everett, who spent his military tour in peacetime Europe in the late 1950s, would be dismissive of Murtha’s decorated combat service reveals a great deal about his attitude toward our troops and veterans — unless one is Republican, it apparently counts for nothing.
Everett owes a very public apology to Rep. Murtha, the U.S. House, America’s military and veterans and the people of Alabama.
Like Murtha, Everett is no idiot. But his remarks, even if made on a low-power AM talk radio in southeast Alabama, were, at best, idiotic.
With friends like Terry Everett, Jay Love has all the enemies he needs.
Where's the outrage? Republican Terry Everett called Democratic colleague Jack Murtha a cut-and-run "idiot" who is "no friend of the military." Will AL-02 candidate Jay Love reject and denounce this statement by Everett, clearly attacking a retired Marine and American patriot?
"And don't talk to me about him being an ex-Marine. Lord, that was 40 years ago. A lot of stuff can happen in 40 years. Thank you for your service as being an ex-Marine but that doesn't mean you're (not) an idiot, and he is."
So honorable service to your country 40 years ago doesn't matter, Congressman Everett? Why don't you tell that to John McCain who frequently uses his service 40 years ago to bolster his credentials for elected office. Republicans are trying to have it both ways regarding military service: Republicans who served, no matter how small the contribution, are heroes; Democrats who actually served in a theater of war are idiots or cowards.
Update: I just noticed that the NRCC is extremely critical of AL-05 Democratic candidate Parker Griffith because Harry Reid said he "couldn't stand" John McCain.
While Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid goes on the record saying that he “can’t stand John McCain,” one has to wonder if Parker Griffith agrees with the Senator’s comment – after all, Griffith contributed $2,000 to Harry Reid’s re-election campaign.
... Considering Parker Griffith has given Harry Reid thousands of dollars in campaign contributions, one can only venture to guess that he supports Harry Reid’s liberal agenda, which apparently includes insulting the Republican nominee for President,” said NRCC spokesman Ken Spain.
That's right, they're criticizing a Democrat because someone he gave money to said he "couldn't stand" John McCain. Meanwhile Terry Everett has given money to Jay Love, stood next to Love while endorsing him and has even campaigned for him. As far as I can find, neither Love nor the NRCC has denounced Everett's insult to Jack Murtha who served 37 years in the Marines. What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander, and this little episode just illustrates what hypocrites Republicans have become.
What do y'all think of Terry Everett's comments? Remember, it's not at a political meeting, this happened at a Chamber of Commerce breakfast.
Retiring District 2 Republican Congressman Terry Everett told a Montgomery Area Chamber of Commerce breakfast crowd that a group of Southern Democrats endorsing Mayor Bobby Bright does more harm than good for conservative legislation.
Everett glanced toward Montgomery Mayor Bobby Bright, sitting a few feet away, while he scoffed at "Blue Dog Democrats" -- a group of mostly Southern Democrats from conservative districts.
"I don't think they have ever passed a bill," he said, "They say they make bad bills better, but for every good thing they do, I can give you 15 ways they hurt."
After the speech, Bright said he was stunned by Everett's comments.
"He put me in my place," Bright said pointing back at the stage. "That is why we need term limits, right there."
Here's video from the Montgomery Advertiser.
My own feeling is that for some reason Everett totally forgot his good manners at this event. Apparently he tried to temper his remarks a bit afterward, but anyone with basic social skills knows you don't overtly slam a fellow guest at a public function. I think these unusually candid (not to say rude) remarks are a sign Everett is very concerned that Republicans will lose his seat this year.
How ugly is the Republican runoff in Alabama's 2nd District? So ugly that Bob Riley and Terry Everett are asking the combatants to clean up their act.
Everett said the "intra-party split must end" and said the candidates should spend the remaining week focusing on the issues important to the nation and to the district. He said voters need to hear the candidates' vision.
...
"To that end, I am calling for both candidates to immediately take down their negative ads, which are actually instruments of personal destruction for the sake of a political win, and instead focus on the issues," Everett said.
...
During a press conference this morning on another issue, Riley said he hoped the candidates would turn away from the contentious tone of the race. He did not ask them to take down ads including video or pictures of him..
Everett, the current Congressman from AL-02, understands that Love and Smith are practicing the politics of "personal destruction for the sake of a political win" rather than explaining what they hope to accomplish and how they would behave if elected. Why is this a surprise? The politics of personal destruction has become the backbone of Republican campaigns, pioneered by the likes of Lee Atwater, Roger Ailes and Karl Rove. It's usually coupled with the permanent political campaign -- once this crowd gets in office the focus is on getting re-elected, not on governing. Every decision is a political calculation which leaves no room whatsoever for leadership. It's great for the political consultants and junkies, a disaster for constituents.
No one should be surprised that Love and Smith are throwing all the mud in the pigpen at each other ... they've grown up in a Republican party where that kind of behavior is rewarded. By now, voters are sick of it, even in Alabama.
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?
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.
Terry Everett has emptied out his PAC and closed it down, but he didn't give anything to the Republican candidates trying to succeed him in AL-02.
But Everett last fall announced he was retiring, so the leadership PAC started cutting checks. It sent $15,580 to other House Republicans, none of them from Alabama; $6,600 to Senate Republican candidates including Jeff Sessions; and $3,300 to Rep. Duncan Hunter's run for the presidency.
As the article points out, Everett still has about $814 K in his campaign account and he can use that to boost his successor if he wants to. The potential successors on the Republican side, Harri Anne Smith and Jay Love, are still locked in a runoff competition that won't be over until mid-July.
Contrast this with the situation in the 5th District where the retiring Bud Cramer has already endorsed Parker Griffith and thrown his support -- and many of his supporters -- behind him. Party unity is helpful.
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.
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.
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.
They both need to decide what to do with a bunch of money. This is a happy change from the usual problem faced by members of Congress -- how to raise money for a campaign every 2 years. With $1.6 million in the kitty, Bud Cramer has the bigger job, but Terry Everett's $800,000 is nothing to sneeze at and is far more than retiring Alabama politicians have had in the past.
Election law prohibits them from using the money for themselves, as in houses, cars or vacations, but they can spend it on just about anything else including political contributions. My bet is that both of these Congressmen will make hefty contributions to a candidate running in their district and will give generously to some favored organizations but won't spend it all just yet.
The money would also come in handy if either of them decided to become a lobbyist post-Congress:
An increasingly common maneuver for retiring members, especially those who go into the lobbying business, is to keep it active, raising and spending money. The tactic, however, has drawn criticism from government watchdog groups that argue a congressman-turned-lobbyist gets a personal benefit by using the money to curry favor with his former colleagues on behalf of his clients.
Spending leftover campaign cash to curry favor as a lobbyist is another one of those legal but unsavory deals.
Bobby Bright has brightened Democratic chances for taking the AL-02 open seat. (Lame joke I know, but it's been a busy morning.) From brownsox at DKos:
The Cook Political Report released its most recent House and Senate race charts several days ago, and most of what movement there is, is good for Democrats.
Five House races (AL-02, LA-06, IL-11, IL-14, and IN-07) have changed rating, along with one Senate race (Alaska).
...
AL-02 OPEN (Everett): Solid Republican to Lean Republican
The entry of Montgomery Mayor Bobby Bright into this race led Cook to jump this race two slots, indicating that we can expect a highly competitive race even in this R+13 district. That's expanding the map, folks.
Montgomery mayor Bobby Bright is officially running as a Democrat in Alabama's second Congressional District. Incumbent Republican Terry Everett is not running again so this will be Alabama's only open Congressional seat this year and there has been a lot of interest from Republicans. Chances are good Mayor Bright will be the only Democrat seeking the position.
Bright told a crowd of about 100 supporters Tuesday at the Dale County Courthouse that he wants to put aside divisive partisan politics and work for all the people of the district in Washington.
Bright says his priorities in Congress will be to fight illegal immigration and to protect the military bases in the 2nd District.
Sounds like a popular platform. According to a 2005 interview with Tavis Smiley, Bright is on the right side of another issue that will be crucial to winning the hearts of 2nd District voters next fall.
Are you old enough to remember the 1972 Miami Dolphins? Went 17-0 through the regular season, the playoffs and the Super Bowl. Did it with a quarterback who threw fewer passes in an average game than the Pope makes during Midnight Mass. I mean a running game of such consistency that nobody could stop them. Score points by the bushel? NOT! Just had a defense so consistent that they didn’t need a bunch of points. CONSISTENCY!
Anybody notice this year’s Dolphins? Consistently awful! Managed to eke out one victory – largely undeserved- against a team almost as pathetic as they were. Awful on offense! Sieve-like on D! Never broke out of their level of incompetence. CONSISTENCY!
Now class,let's learn the names of the Repugnican political stalwarts in office in the State of Alabama. What's that, Johnny? Stalwarts. Yes, of course, it's an easy one to remember. All they do when asked to take action for Alabama's families and children is STALL. Got that part? Fine. And they are about as useful as a bunch of-what? Correct, class, a bunch of WARTS. Well done. Now here we go. How can you ever remember their names and what they stand for?
Let's start with the senators. There are two of them. Johnny, you will have to stop interrupting. Yes, I'm quite sure there are two of them. Of course I realize it's hard to tell them apart; they're Repugnicans, aren't they? Now. let's get down to the hard work.
Bush is certain to veto this, but the House of Representatives passed a $50 billion war funding bill with a timeline for troop withdrawal. It was a mostly party line vote with Congressmen Bud Cramer and Artur Davis voting for the bill and all the Republicans in the Alabama delegation voting against it.
The bill states that the primary purpose of the money "should be to transition the mission of United States Armed Forces in Iraq and undertake their redeployment."
It demands that Bush begin withdrawing troops from Iraq within 30 days of passage, with a goal of having American combat troops out of Iraq by December 15, 2008.
The $50 billion "bridge fund" is about a quarter of the nearly $200 billion the Bush administration has requested to pay for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan for 2008. Most of the money is slated for Iraq, where the Pentagon estimates the cost of its operations at about $10 billion a month.
"The fact is, we can no longer militarily sustain the deployment in Iraq," said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-California. "Staying there in the manner we are there is no longer an option."
Update: Rep. Kucinich and 3 other Democrats voted against this bill because it doesn't do enough to get U.S. troops out of Iraq. There will be problems getting it through the Senate.
The legislation must still clear the Senate, which might not happen until after the Thanksgiving recess. Sen. Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has said he would force Republicans to filibuster the bill and not pass legislation that includes any supplemental funding this year.
The battle to fund health insurance for children in working class American families is starting to feel like Groundhog Day -- we're just stuck in an endless loop. The Senate passed the SCHIP bill 64-30 yesterday, after Republicans rejected more negotiations toward a bipartisan compromise. Do they not want a genuine bipartisan compromise, or something?
The House passed the bill last week and Bush is expected to veto it again, soon. The Decider doesn't waste any time when he's deciding to deny health insurance to American kids, you know.
All the Republican members of Alabama's House delegation voted against SCHIP - three times now, if we count the attempt to override Bush's first veto - so we know where they come down on this issue. I say the only solution is to make sure there are fewer Alabama Republicans in our House delegation in the next Congress.
We need to support candidates who will accurately and honestly represent the wishes and values of Alabama citizens in Washington, DC, not political rubber stampers like Aderholt, Bachus, Bonner, Everett and Rogers are showing themselves to be.
Democratic candidates Ben Lodmell and Greg Warren have been taking their opponents to task over the SCHIP vote. Let's get behind them and help retire Bonner and Aderholt next year, at least.
Robert Aderholt, whose name led all the rest, voted against a new State Children's Health Insurance Program reauthorization bill today. He was followed closely by the rest of Alabama's Republican Congressmen: Spencer Bachus, Jo Bonner, Terry Everett and Mike Rogers. Naturally, they were acting as rubber stamps for George Bush -- again! Empty out Fort Knox to pay for foreign wars, but not a penny to spare for America's children. Go figure. Better yet, go vote -- against these turkeys -- on Nov. 3rd, 2008.
I'll say it again: Democrats should be lined up three deep to run against these guys next year. And Everett is retiring, so the 2nd District race is even more attractive.
Alabama Republican Congressmen Robert Aderholt, Spencer Bachus, Jo Bonner, Terry Everett and Mike Rogers voted to uphold George Bush's veto of the State Children's Health Insurance Plan reauthorization act last week. They gave a variety of inane reasons for the vote. The Anniston Star calls them on the hypocrisy of it all:
Although health officials in Alabama warned that thousands of low-income children in this state could lose health insurance if Congress did not override President Bush's veto of the State Children's Health Insurance Program, Alabama's Republican representatives lined up like good little soldiers and did what their commander-in-chief wanted them to do — sustain the veto.
We might be willing to accept their claims that the bill was (as one of them put it) a "first major step toward socialized medicine" or was, as another claimed, supported by a punitive tax on tobacco products. But only if these off-the-wall statements didn't fly in the face of what Republicans claim are their core beliefs and if their action did not stand in stark contrast to how they have voted in the past.
Good advice to Alabama Republicans from that bastion of left-wing liberalism, the Birmingham News.
Unfortunately, Democratic U.S. Reps. Artur Davis and Bud Cramer are alone among Alabama members of Congress who favored the bipartisan bill that would expand the health insurance program for children of poor working families. U.S. Sens. Richard Shelby and Jeff Sessions and Reps. Robert Aderholt, Spencer Bachus, Jo Bonner, Terry Everett and Mike Rogers - all Republicans - side with Bush against SCHIP expansion.
...
many working families, particularly those without employer-subsidized insurance, can't afford the $12,000 to $13,000 a year private insurance costs. And, as far as cost, it's hypocritical for the president and lawmakers to pass a $700 billion Medicare prescription drug bill - a badly flawed one at that - and then say the country can't afford $35 billion to provide insurance for children.
Alabama's congressmen should think hard about what's more important: Protecting the health of children or protecting the veto of a misguided president.
They won't think hard about it, of course. These good little Republicans have been told what to think by the most unpopular President since Nixon, and they're sticking to him it. Lemmings.
Alabama Republican Congressmen Robert Aderholt, Spencer Bachus, Jo Bonner, Terry Everett and Mike Rogers voted against the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) reauthorization, as did Republican Senators Jeff Sessions and Richard Shelby.
MoveOn is raising money to air this TV ad to highlight the need for SCHIP reauthorization -- and the need for Congress to override Bush's veto of that reauthorization.
Did you get that? HEALTHCARE FOR 800,000 AMERICAN CHILDREN COSTS THE SAME AS ONE WEEK IN IRAQ. Plus, Congress has identified a souce of funds for the SCHIP -- the war in Iraq just adds to the national debt that Bush is leaving for our kids and grandkids to pay. Those would be the same kids that he wants to deny health insurance to right now.
Via email:
We need to remind Republicans there will be dramatic consequences if they stand with Bush on this one. The consequences aren't just political: this means real health problems for millions of real kids.
One of those kids is Bethany, a 2-year-old girl born with a heart defect who's only healthy today because of the SCHIP children's health program. Our friends at USAction put together an ad with her story, and we want to raise money to tell that story in the districts of representatives who vote wrong.
...
Bethany Wilkerson was born with several holes in her heart. Her family lives in St. Petersburg, Florida, on an annual income of $34,000—not poor, but unable to afford private health insurance. Even if they could, Bethany's "pre-existing condition" makes it impossible to qualify. Only because of SCHIP is Bethany healthy today.
With children's lives hanging in the balance, this is a politically risky vote for Republicans, and they're watching public reaction closely to decide what to do. We're announcing our ad to the local press in the districts of our top targets. No member of Congress will be able to vote against our kids without knowing they will be held accountable by voters.
...
President Bush vetoed SCHIP because it's such a successful public program—and the right-wing's ideology is about running the government into the ground to keep it from serving the common good. But children's health care has so much popular support that Bush's supporters are paying a heavy political price for defending this failed ideology.
The Republicans are so up in arms to get rid of SCHIP precisely because it is a successful government program that helps people. That endangers the whole conservative ideology, which can be summed up as EVERY MAN FOR HIMSELF. And women don't count anyway because they ought to be barefoot and pregnant.
T.H.E. Social Work Agency Adoption home studies & care management services in the North Alabama area.
Licensed, certified, caring social workers. blog advertising is good for you
How ugly is the Republican runoff in Alabama's 2nd District? So ugly that 
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 
Montgomery mayor 
