winning by losing Archives

October 2, 2006

Nice work, if you can get it

We've speculated here before about what drives the Democrats. Are they, as conventional Poli Sci suggests, a vote-maximizing enterprise? Or are they something else?

A delightful hatchet job on John Murtha in the New York Times paints in some vivid evidence for an alternative theory:

A gang of about two dozen Democrats mill around [Murtha's] seat. A procession of others walk back to request pet spending projects, known as earmarks. And Republicans come by, asking him to enlist some of those Democrats to join them on close votes. “Whether they get what they want in the bill or they get the votes they are looking for, nobody ever leaves completely disappointed,” said Representative Paul E. Kanjorski, a Pennsylvania Democrat often found in what is known as the Murtha corner.

As the top Democrat on the House military spending subcommittee, he often delivers Democratic votes to Republican leaders in a tacit exchange for earmarks for himself and his allies.

In the last year, Democratic and Republican floor watchers say, Mr. Murtha has helped Republicans round up enough Democratic votes to narrowly block a host of Democratic proposals: to investigate federal contracting fraud in Iraq, to reform lobbying laws, to increase financing for flood control, to add $150 million for veterans’ health care and job training, and to exempt middle-class families from the alternative minimum tax....

Mr. Murtha can punish lawmakers, as well. Those who do not support the defense spending bill, for example, discover their next earmark requests go nowhere....

“He delivers Democrats for key votes, which increases his clout and ability to get more earmarks, which then increases his ability to get Democratic votes,” said Steve Ellis, a vice president of Taxpayers for Common Sense....

Mr. Murtha has used his influence in the caucus to place friends in strategic positions on appropriations committees and other House panels. Representative Nancy Pelosi, a California liberal who is the current Democratic leader, is a close Murtha ally. He put her on the appropriations committee early in her career and managed her campaign to be leader.

Well, read the whole thing. I hate to say anything good about the New York Times, but this is a very revealing item. Jack Murtha doesn't need a majority in the House -- he's doing just fine as it is, thank you.

In fact, looking at this story alongside the juicy details of the Foley scandal, I'm tempted to withdraw my earlier harsh comments about the seraglio of pages. The more time these guys spend buggering the pages, the less time they have to fuck the public.

March 12, 2009

The fire last time, this time, next time...

Of course, no historical parallel works very well. But I like the one between the US and Japan between 1930 and 1941, on the one hand, and what may evolve between the US and People's China now, on the other.

The Sino-American collision may evolve more slowly perhaps and more obviously, but -- the odd lack of popular interest in this relationship, both back then when it unfolded, and now, leaves its lessons unnoticed.

The Washington/Tokyo contretemps during that period is better known, of course, and it sure exceeds the Euro sturm-und-drang gaffery by yards in its instructive value.

The humanitarian crusade in Europe, and the inter-imperial tangle in east Asia need to be seen as quite distinct and nearly opposite qualitative actions, from the Yankee boy-hegemon perspective.

It's really too bad Pearl Harbor gives our inevitable war of Asian aggression such a romantic cover story.

Better than the war against African slavery? Well, no. Better than the war against Nazi horror camps? Well, no.

Better then the GWOT's twin-tower curtain-raiser?

Well... yes.

September 18, 2009

Hen Cackling and Piecards

every hot rad wants a union movement that is pulling off
organizing actions like tea bag rallys
and why aren't they
why can't our unions raise the level of play enough to start a prairie fire here ??

if 60 million jobbled mcsmurfs want a union the wood must be plenty dry

so where's the spark??

where's the key beef ???

where's the galvinizing paradigm action where's the paradigm job site ??

are they really that cowed that isolated that demoralized

is saying ya i'd like a union just an indirect way of saying
i need a raise ???

since at least the mid 70's the search for the holy grail has gone no where

holy grail??
the magic organizing model

well here's a problem
the desire to produce more orged workers occludes another problem

the job done today across the USA for the 11 or so million pri sec orged workers

a poll i'd like to see is
"how do you rate your union (brother or sister )?"


beyond cries of utterly abstract gibber about "bottom up revolts "

or demands for delightful ends like "rank and file control "

but absent a road map gettin us there

or weakest of all

simple nation mag like calls for "union democracy "

so how about gettin all three and a way there too ???

a form of rank and file control

that is both democratic and bottom up


periodic unit certification elections

open these up

routinize 'em let who ever wants to compete to rep the unit in the next contract drive
face off over a ballot box
the federation and the changelings together oughta sponsor this

instead of the antique gomper room shit about the sacred rights of the franchise holders

notice the present scrap between SEIU and the renigade NUHW

now that's a wonderful development


two outfits slugging it out toe to toe for certification as the exclusive bargaining agent for tens of thousands of healthcare workers

and at the unit level comrades unit by unit retail voting at its best ..yes elections based on challenges

not statutes but...

just rolling out one after the other

instead of abhoring this

it oughta be institutionalized right along side the 3 year contract cycle

nothing new here by any means of course

but it flips the take you are hearing beltched from most prog horns eh?

not only on the bay area roller derby

but even more basic there's el duce andy stern of the steamrollers union's other great raid of '09


his shivering off of unite from its non identical irish twin HERE

a scoup move that may net him a 5 billion dollar bank !!!

oh the poor rump of HERE ..what can ya say??

well fight you geefs fight em

if your units loved ya how can u lose a cert fight ...right ??

a ballot to hold your own turf ??

glorious jousting ??

not sez the high level piecards

remember back in july at the HERE convention all the huff and puff ??

why it caused more big union chiefs to turn hen cacklers

then the rape of the sabine women

June 10, 2010

Just ignore him and he'll go away

For those who are blissfully unaware, this is the leader of the Liberal Party of Canada, Michael Ignatieff. Yes, that Michael Ignatieff.

Since being recruited to lead the party in 2006, Iggy has been doing his best Uriah Heep impression in an attempt to convince the common hoser that he is ever so 'umble and not at all the arrogant, grasping, narcissist fraud that we all know he is. To my delight, he has failed spectacularly.

First he lost the Liberal leadership to the laughably inept Stephane Dion. Then, after a dismal showing in the last election, the ever-unpopular Ignatieff had to be installed as party leader by fiat because it was again unclear that he could garner enough votes to win within his own party. That brings us to the present deadlock:

Conservative - 31.4% Liberal - 26.8% NDP - 16.6% Green - 12.6% Bloc Quebecois - 8.9%

The minority Conservative government lacks the votes to actually pass any legislation, but if Ignatieff were to vote down any important bill, it would trigger an election that he would lose, thus ending his reign as Liberal leader. In order to avoid facing the public, Ignatieff has shamelessly collaborated with the Conservatives to pass all manner of heinous legislation.

The upside to this whole sordid saga is that the Canadian public has yet to be cowed into voting him in as the "lesser evil". Even though 68% of the public is firmly on the left, they have stoically withstood the four year assault on the country's core values, the incompetent leadership, and the international embarrassment without resorting to lesser evilism.

Unfortunately, an Orthrian plot is now afoot, with the Liberal and the NDP party elders discussing a merger. As tempting as it would be to see the Conservatives permanently removed from power, I really hope that this does not come to pass. Why risk 8 years of Ignatieff rule at a time when we could be rid of this scumbag for good? With any luck, the Canadian electorate will be able to follow Schumann Total Management Protocol and "keep the focus focused on core competencies" such as the implacable distrust of Ivy League alumni, until Iggy finally packs his bags and goes back to Boston.

About winning by losing

This page contains an archive of all entries posted to Stop Me Before I Vote Again in the winning by losing category. They are listed from oldest to newest.

Who is this left anyway? is the previous category.

worth a thousand words is the next category.

Many more can be found on the main index page or by looking through the archives.

Creative Commons License
This weblog is licensed under a Creative Commons License.
Powered by
Movable Type 3.31