Daily Show’s Stewart Says Arkansas An Emerging Leader

…among states exporting “absolute b#tsh!t insanity,” that is.

Nothing like some nice dead-fish and dead-bird stories to put Arkansas in the national spotlight and start the new year off right.

Up yours, Palmetto State!

2012: Huck’s National Ad Campaign Backfiring?

You might have stumbled across the new nationwide ad that features our former-Governor-turned-Sunshine-Stater Mike Huckabee asking supporters to call a 1-800 number to sign a repeal petition against President Obama’s healthcare reform package. Likely unnoticed during the course of your New Year’s celebrations, however, came an embarrassing bit of news out of the political action committee responsible for the ad/2012 campaign commercial, Restore America’s Voice.

Ken Hoagland, personal friend of The Huckster and the PAC’s chairman, was forced to formally react to media questioning following initial reports from the liberal website Think Progress which highlighted the PAC’s Fox News-premiered “Repeal it Now” anti-healthcare-reform ad was being headed by Derek Oberholtzer of 949 Media Group — the same scam artist made infamous for his “Apply 2 Save” foreclosure relief program that defrauded distressed homeowners across the country.

Hoagland initially denied any wrongdoings, insisting that 949 Media was hired only for web consulting and never given a leadership role, despite filings with the Federal Election Commission that seem to show the campaign has been managed by the firm its inception in October. After mounting pressure, however, the PAC decided to part ways with the “consultant,” though the ad keeps running during the mornings and afternoons on various cable news networks (and Fox News as well).

Restore America’s Voice Responds

A growing campaign to repeal the healthcare act today announced that it had terminated a contract with one of its web consultants after reports of the consultant’s involvement in problematic projects in the past.

Ken Hoagland, chairman of Restore America’s Voice said, “We have terminated the services of 949 Media after we saw a web report last night detailing prior complaints involving its participation in certain mortgage relief marketing activities.” Hoagland said that 949 Media was a subcontracting vendor “responsible for web consulting but was never tasked with any management or leadership role” within the growing national campaign, as originally reported.

“We were unaware of the seriousness of the past issues with this vendor and we have taken immediate action to terminate the relationship. No public official working with us to repeal the healthcare act had any knowledge of nor relationship with any vendor or subcontractor,” said Hoagland.

Hoagland said that the campaign was working with “many technology and web companies and would continue to build the largest single petition drive in the history of the nation in an effort to repeal the Healthcare Reform Act through grassroots action.”

It remains to be seen how much Huckabee was paid as pitchman for the campaign. Media Matters has tracked a slew of efforts by the 2012 presidential GOP hopeful in recent years to raise funds for political groups that ultimately serve to benefit himself or his family.

2012: Barbour Backtracks

By now, you’ve probably picked up on the story over the weekend that’s caused quite a stir regarding current Mississippi Gov. and would-be 2012 GOP presidential contender Haley Barbour. In a wide-ranging profile, the conservative Weekly Standard interviewer brings up the topic of race relations in Barbour’s hometown of Yazoo City, MS during the late 1950s/early 1960s, which led to either a terribly ignorant or purposely overlooked depiction of the segregationist Citizens Council organization and its local chapters that existed during that time, and the overall state of affairs in the state most consider the mecca of American racism. 

[Other interviewees concluded that] Yazoo City was perhaps the only municipality in Mississippi that managed to integrate the schools without violence. I asked Haley Barbour why he thought that was so. 

“Because the business community wouldn’t stand for it,” he said. “You heard of the Citizens Councils? Up north they think it was like the KKK. Where I come from it was an organization of town leaders. In Yazoo City they passed a resolution that said anybody who started a chapter of the Klan would get their ass run out of town. If you had a job, you’d lose it. If you had a store, they’d see nobody shopped there. We didn’t have a problem with the Klan in Yazoo City.”

In interviews Barbour doesn’t have much to say about growing up in the midst of the civil rights revolution. “I just don’t remember it as being that bad,” he said.

Of course, that’s not exactly the case regarding the Citizens Council —

The White Citizens Council movement was founded in Mississippi in 1954, shortly after the Brown v. Board of Education Supreme Court decision that outlawed segregated public schools, and was dedicated to political activities opposing civil rights – notably boycotts of pro-civil rights individuals in Barbour’s hometown, as opposed to Barbour’s recollection of actions against the Klan. It was distinguished from the Klan by the public self-identification of its members, and its image of suits and ties as opposed to white robes and nooses.

— and I don’t think I have to tell you that things definitely still were that bad (for African-Americans, not privileged whites like Barbour) in Mississippi  during that time. No, I don’t have to tell you, but Max Brantley’s words this morning stuck with me enough that I’m going to let him tell you:

It interests me because Barbour is three years older than I am. It’s true, as he has been quoted, that times weren’t “that bad” for me, either. But I was white. Those “reserve the right to refuse service to anyone” signs still hanging in restaurants in my southern hometown then didn’t apply to me. The invitation-only high school Christmas dance included my name on the guest list because I was white. None was sent to a black student.

Maybe Yazoo City in enlightened Mississippi was farther advanced. (Noted: Ole Miss’ first black football player arrived in 1972, three years after Barbour would have graduated had he not dropped out; the Rebel flag and “Dixie” would persist for decades.) A handful of brave black kids received high school diplomas with my Louisiana class in 1968, but we were the only high school in the parish so progressive, thanks to a liberal city school superintendent.

That Haley Barbour sugarcoats those days tells you a little about him and a lot about what he perceives of attitudes in Mississippi and the country. It suggests: “What’s all the bitching about? Segregation is over. We’re all post-racial now. The 60s? It wasn’t all THAT bad. Get over it.” The Schwerners, Chaneys, Goodmans, Everses and Kings and many more might have different memories.

After the resulting firestorm caused by the Gov’s revisionist history, his spokesman Dan Turner went on offense, attacking the interviewer, the “angle of the questioning,” and attempting to say Barbour was actually trying to tell us something other than what we all just read. After that effort clearly fell flat, Team Barbour reassessed the damage and came out this morning with the following statement:

“When asked why my hometown in Mississippi did not suffer the same racial violence when I was a young man that accompanied other towns’ integration efforts, I accurately said the community leadership wouldn’t tolerate it and helped prevent violence there. My point was my town rejected the Ku Klux Klan, but nobody should construe that to mean I think the town leadership were saints, either. Their vehicle, called the ‘Citizens Council,’ is totally indefensible, as is segregation. It was a difficult and painful era for Mississippi, the rest of the country, and especially African Americans who were persecuted in that time.”

For those that have followed Barbour over the years (or those of us who have read up on him in recent months in regards to Decision 2012 profiling), the type of attitude displayed here can’t be all that surprising. Is Barbour a racist? I don’t know the answer to that — only he could tell what truly rests in his heart. But I can tell you he’s proven to be the type that’s just not all that apologetic about his state’s ugly past when it comes to black/white race relations, which is unfortunate given his political stature and ability to influence others.

So, what does all of this mean in terms of the GOP presidential primaries in 2012? Well, I think it will serve as the cold shower to anyone trying to convince themselves ol’ Haley has a shot in hell come time to nominate Barack Obama’s next opponent. In fact, I’ve made it a point to never list him when talking about serious contenders like Palin, Huckabee, Romney, Gingrich, Thune, and others. The thought of the GOP seriously considering nominating an aging and bloated Mississippi good ol’ boy to be the person to defeat the first African-American president ever elected to office has always been beyond laughable to me. In fact, outside of that gal from Alaska, I can’ t think of anyone else being mentioned right now who could possibly fair worse in a match-up against the incumbent prez in two years.

Addressed By The POTUS

In his Weekly Address, President Obama urges the Senate to heed the calls from Presidents George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton, every living Republican Secretary of State, our NATO allies, and the leadership of the military: ratify the New START Treaty with Russia.

You can catch the president’s address on BHR every Saturday, shortly after it is released by the White House.

Stand-alone DADT Repeal Passes House; Ross Votes Against

Hoping to put pressure on the Senate with less than three weeks remaining in the session, the Democratic-led House of Representatives passed a stand-alone bill today that would finally end the military’s discriminatory ban on openly gay men and women serving in the armed forces.

The House voted 250-175 to repeal the so-called “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” law, with 15 Republicans voting in favor and 15 Democrats voting against, including Arkansas Reps John Boozman and Mike Ross (Snyder voted “yes” and Berry was a no-show…again). We would expect nothing less from Repug Boozman, but what’s keeping Ross from coming around? Still voting no, despite the President, Secretary of Defense Gates, the majority of current military service members, the majority of Arkansans, and even fellow conservadem Mark Pryor having had enough of this discrimination?

Senate action is now required for the bill to go to the president’s desk before new members of the House and Senate will be sworn in and Republicans will take back control of the House Jan. 4, which will render a serious repeal effort will be all but dead in the short-term. The House had previously voted on a defense authorization bill that included DADT repeal, but efforts stalled in the Senate as Republicans successfully filibustered the bill and few conservadems were willing to get on the side of social progress.

Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates is pleased with today’s House of Representatives vote to repeal the law that bans gays from serving openly in the military, Pentagon Press Secretary Geoff Morrell said, and he hopes the Senate will follow suit before its current session ends.

“[The secretary] encourages the Senate to pass the legislation this session, enabling the Department of Defense to carefully and responsibly manage a change in this policy instead of risking an abrupt change resulting from a decision in the courts,” Morrell said.

In a statement released by the White House, Obama praised House leaders for moving forward on repeal.

“I applaud the House for passing, with bipartisan support, the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell Repeal Act of 2010,” the president said. “Legislative repeal is supported by the secretary of defense and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The process contained in this legislation allows for a smooth and responsible repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” in a way that maintains good order and discipline in our military ranks.

“Indeed,” he continued, “all of the service chiefs have said that when this law is changed, they will implement an orderly transition effectively and efficiently. As the comprehensive study by the Department of Defense clearly shows, we can move to a new policy in a responsible manner that ensures our military strength and our national security.”

Ross, on the other hand, apparently knows better than them (and most of the rest of us):

“I believe the current ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ policy is working for our Armed Forces and now is not the time to enact this change while our service men and women are in the middle of two ongoing wars. Several military commanders and generals strongly oppose repealing ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ and we simply cannot ignore those voices in this debate.

“I agree with one service member who was quoted in the Defense Department’s ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ survey when he said, ‘I believe this is not the time for us to make huge changes in the military. We are at war and our men and women overseas do not need any more distractions. This issue should be addressed at the appropriate time. That time is not now.”

UPDATE: The Huffington Post is reporting that there may be hope for a 60-vote/filibuster proof DADT repeal measure passing in the Senate:

Steny Hoyer spoke with HuffPost Hill after the House vote and said that he’s been told by Joe Lieberman and Susan Collins that they have at least 60 commitments to support repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. Hoyer said that he reached out to Lieberman after the last failed Senate cloture vote and offered to have the House move first. “I called and talked to a number of people. I then called Senator Lieberman and said, ‘Joe, my intent will be to talk to Congressman Murphy,’ — who’s the sponsor of the amendment that was adopted in the defense bill — ‘and put this in as a free standing bill, because we can probably send it over to you more quickly than you can send to us.’ And he agreed and we introduced exactly the same bill that we have in the Senate,” Hoyer said.

Huck Would Back Jeb Bush In 2012

In an interview posted on the National Journal’s website yesterday, our former gov and national conservastar Mike Huckabee, when opining on the 2012 GOP presidential landscape, said that the one person out there that could jump in the race and keep him on the sidelines as a supporter would be the “brilliant” Jeb Bush.

National Journal: Is there anybody who might run for president who would keep you out of the race, either because of that person’s strength as a candidate or because you liked and respected him or her?

Huckabee: If Jeb Bush wanted to jump in, I’d probably go help him. I love Jeb; I think he’s brilliant. He was an excellent governor. I have the highest of admiration for him. He could certainly raise the money, and I think he’d clear the deck. I think there’s a lot of very capable, qualified people, and some aren’t the obvious ones. Nobody ever heard of me four years ago, and I ended up coming in second. Nobody expected that, and that’s how things should be.

Probably a safe answer here for Huckabee — “ain’t nobody out there better than me right now” might’ve came off just a tad pretentious — but I think most of realize that the ambitious former Baptist preacher turned book peddling tv/radio personality has convinced himself that with a little better organization he just might’ve came from national obscurity to best John McCain during his first run in 2008 and has been positioning himself for 2012 ever since. Could he really improve upon his ’08 showing and be the favorite in ’12? Despite (very) early polls indicating yes, we know a field likely to include Sarah Palin, Newt Gingrich, Mitt Romney, and person or two from the lesser-known second-tier (Tim Pawlenty, John Thune, Rick Santorum, Haley Barbour, Rick Perry, etc.), will make bridging the gaps between the Old Guard, the Evangelicals, and the Tea Party tough for anyone. That said, although he may be the person best suited in a party unified in opposition to Obama but fractured in its vision for the future, the 43rd president’s older bro has made it quite clear he has no intention of throwing his hat in the ring right now.

UPDATE: You can expect plenty of 2012 presidential primary coverage from BHR in the coming months, and yours truly will be all over it. In fact, we’re adding a seperate “2012” topic category today. That said, let me go ahead and get out there right now and say that I don’t think the GOP nominee will be Palin, Romney, Gingrich or The Huck. I’ll take South Dakota Rep. John Thune as my sleeper pick and Texas Gov. Rick Perry as my wild card.

Timmywatch: The Case Against Griffin?

Said Ernie Dumas:

Griffin made the group’s list of delinquent aspirants for his part in a sleazy scheme to keep blacks and other potential Democratic voters in Florida away from the polls in the 2004 presidential election when he was an operative for the Republican National Committee and for his unsavory role in the U.S. attorney scandal in 2006, which forced the resignation of seven top Justice Department officials, including the attorney general of the United States.

Wild allegations from the always-reliable Dumas? Hardly.

AR-02: Building Upon the Snyder Legacy?

You may have already passed by your office pile of this week’s Arkansas Times and noticed retiring Congressman Vic Snyder on the cover. Yes, just a few days before the (non-early) voters finally weigh in on the Race to Replace Arkansas’s True Blue Democrat, the state’s leading progressive publication has finally cast the spotlight on that “other” highly important Democratic primary battle. In AR-02, Democratic voters have a choice between keeping this seat squarely in the corner of progress and compassionate legislating or trying to “be more like them” by watering down the message and attempting to ignore big issues facing our country because of the fear of what the latest Arkansas poll may say on the matter.

Times writer Doug Smith’s Four of a Kind story is well written, and it articulates the mood of Ark Dems and the decision they’re being forced to make when they enter the voting booth:

Many followers of Arkansas politics believe chances are slim that the Second Congressional District will elect a successor of comparably leftish views. Aspirants are not lacking, however. Five Democrats are seeking their party’s nomination, and four of them resemble Snyder in political orientation. (Though, like Snyder himself, they don’t shout their liberal inclinations.) But three of these are practically unknown, with the election imminent, and the fourth is a black woman. Arkansas has never sent a black woman to Congress. The fifth Democrat is more conservative than the others, and he’s the best-financed of the bunch, the “establishment” candidate, expected by many to lead the ticket in the first primary. The two candidates in the Republican primary are, like all Republicans these days, proudly far-right. One, the favorite in that race, is a Karl Rove protege. From Vic Snyder to Karl Rove is a long drop.

Smith reiterates what we already know: House Speaker Robbie Wills has led an incumbent-style campaign and has attempted (and, somehow, largely succeeded) to get away with not answering the toughest and most potentially divisive questions during interviews and in debates. Though he flatly stated he would have voted “no” to federal healthcare reform, and despite the efforts by candidates David Boling and John Adams to hold him accountable on this stance during the three debates, Wills “These Hands” approach keeps on working somehow as he goes about dodging the issue and spinning his original answer with deliberate mistatements about how reform will affect the state’s Medicaid obligations. In our minds, local media has not done enough to contrast the differences between Wills and the rest of the field, and, instead, has almost rubber-stamped his front-runner status and “inevitable” primary victory. Just another in a long line of name-only good ol’ boy Democrats from Arkansas, if you ask us.

AR-02: Timmy! v. ???

Though the Times rolled out their rather unsurprising endorsement of liberal stalwart State Senator Joyce Elliott last week, we here at TWP have noted her perhaps-too-out-there-even-for-progressives statements in the debates as well as the elephant in the room, her electability in a general election tilt. Smith also notes Elliott’s statements, such as “fairness doesn’t mean treating everyone the same way” as potential problems for her in this primary and moreso in a November match-up vs. Rove-protege Timmy! Griffin or Huckster-wannabe Scott Wallace.  We do not see her as the candidate best positioned to carry on the Snyder Legacy — one of progressive views, but also with a pragmatism any legislator from this state must bring with them in order to achieve anything meaningful.

So, again we ask, who is the best choice in this field to carry on the Snyder Legacy? Surely his chief-of-staff of the past two years, right? Well, we’ve recounted David Boling’s shortcomings during this primary — most notably how his $300,000+ spent on this campaign in order to be third or fourth in the polls is perhaps one of the biggest election flops we’ve seen here in recent years — and given the fact that Snyder himself hasn’t endorsed Boling (or anyone else), perhaps voters are barking up the wrong tree with that choice. We do applaud his attempts to contrast his positions vs. Wills’, but he just hasn’t been able to connect with voters at the debates or on television.

Lil’ P.K. takes it to tha district… state… world… SOMETHING?

Ok, so we all know that there’s one hot-headed candidate more than willing to contrast himself against the others, but that candidate has offended and alienated so many people (including Jesus?) in such a short time during this primary that we honestly look for him to head back home to South Carolina with his tail between his legs at this point.  Smith notes the “anger” shown by him. It seems that Lil’ P. Kennedy is like a homeless man’s Howard Dean — has the rolled-up sleeves and foaming at the mouth down, but comes nowhere near the adept understanding of policy the former DNC Chair always shows.

Adams: Campaigning on Competence

As Smith mentions, and as more and more local progressives have seemingly started to notice in the past couple of weeks, the real “issues-driven candidate” with the palatable demeanor is Blue Hog Report’s AR-02 endorsee, John Adams. In fact, it was Adams’ performances in the three debates that forced us to think more about his campaign — one under-the-radar in some respects, but one that has been the most consistent, pragmatic, and closest to Snyder’s core values as a lawmaker. Snyder may be given the “liberal” label here, but he is hardly far left by most national standards; rather, he has brought many of the same qualities to office that Adams could bring — ideologically progressive and forward-thinking, but inoffensive and able to win in Republican-leaning election years.

Adams delivered his third straight sound debate performance at the Sticky Fingerz debate Tuesday night. While once again not receiving the local buzz generated by Wills’ rehearsed one-liners or Lil’ P.K.’s post-debate tweets, he was the candidate tackling issues, such as making our tax code fair with true reforms and acknowledging America’s status as the world’s military super power must be re-examined in the context of the world we now face where globalization and the effect of terrorism has changed the 20th Century rules we’ve been playing by.

Who’s Your Congressman? (Arkansas Times)

Most importantly, perhaps, is Adams’ potential electability in a November showdown with whoever the Repugs choose. I just hope voters will give him a second look because he could just the right person at the right time to keep the seat.

An uphill battle to get the chance? Certainly. But hard to not believe in the cause with responses like that, isn’t it?

Frustrated By Today’s Politics

So, once again, those ridiculous, yet frustratingly effective (politically speaking) Repugs dust off the old fear-mongering playbook, flood our televisions with their mistruths, sway public opinion, and seemingly put to bed any real chance of reform that could help millions of uninsured Americans get the healthcare they need and save our economy down the road. All of this despite several attempts by Democrats to compromise and bring them to the negotiating table, especially in the Senate debate, where the public option proposal was first scaled down, then effectively dropped, and the “no state boundary restrictions to buying health insurance” proposal was included.

As an Obama supporter, I admit it’s been a tough go the last few months. People like me, who felt that his presidency was the last real shot we had for a new tone in Washington and at accomplishing some truly significant bipartisan reforms were quickly shown that the honeymoon was to be short-lived and that apparently nobody will ever end the gridlock. Friends of mine on the Left feel he’s not living up to what they expected–“disappointed” is the word I hear over and over–while my friends on the Right can’t seem to get past this caricature they’ve created. Despite those sentiments, it’s not as if the country wants to return to what we saw in the 2000s–it’s that they’re fed up with the entire process, which is certainly justified at this point, no matter your political leaning. But I hope people see what’s really been happening: we have the political party that controls 40% of the legislative body thinking they should dictate 80-90% of the legislation. That’s just a ridiculous way to even begin negotiation. That same party is now so fenced in by its own rhetoric now that any slight move towards possibly working with this administration is something that could cost them their next election. How will we ever move forward like this?! Are we really in an era where nothing important will ever pass again without one party having complete control of all branches of government?!

/ends rant