After Your Dream Comes True, What Do You Do With The Leftover Dough? By Geniusofdespair

One of the problem sitting County Commissioners have is: What do they do with the obscene amount of leftover cash, sitting in their campaign accounts, after they crush their opponents? In 2008 Vile Natacha Seijas had to face that very problem when she collected $304,426. Natacha, of course, works for the "Y" so she gave them the most, $55,000. Terry Murphy, her Chief of Staff, was past president of ASPA, they got $5,000. My least favorite gay bashing group, Christian Family Coalition got $3,000. The Latin Builders Association got $2,000 and the Hialeah Chamber of Commerce got $10,000. Doesn't Miami Lakes have a chamber too? Anyway, just thought it was interesting to see where this money goes.

Pepe Diaz and Javier Souto will be facing the same problem come October. Maybe they can just disburse it to Natacha's groups, some of the same ones that helped get her elected.

From The Florida Independent: Environmental group alleges that another nutrient standards-blocking rider is in the works

Only weeks after reports surfaced that Florida U.S. Reps. Ander Crenshaw, R-Jacksonville, and Allen Boyd, D-Tallahassee, were attempting to introduce a rider that would essentially delay the EPA’s Numeric Nutrient Standards from taking effect, rumors of another rider have begun to circulate. (please click, 'read more')

From:

The Florida Independent
Environmental group alleges that another nutrient standards-blocking rider is in the works
By VIRGINIA CHAMLEE 7/27/10 7:59 AM


Rep. Ander Crenshaw, R-Jacksonville
Only weeks after reports surfaced that Florida U.S. Reps. Ander Crenshaw, R-Jacksonville, and Allen Boyd, D-Tallahassee, were attempting to introduce a rider that would essentially delay the EPA’s Numeric Nutrient Standards from taking effect, rumors of another rider have begun to circulate.

The proposal of Numeric Nutrient Standards came about after several environmental groups, including the Sierra Club and the St. Johns Riverkeeper, filed suit against the EPA, alleging that the Clean Water Act mandates the use of standards to protect Florida waters. The groups won, and at least part of the standards are slated to go into effect come October.

But David Guest, attorney with the environmental law firm EarthJustice, says that “the word on the street” is that several congressmen from Florida, including Boyd and Crenshaw, along with several “polluter-lobbyists” are again trying to delay the standards from ever taking effect. The list of those allegedly scheduled to meet with the Florida congressional delegation is long and includes lawyers, Florida utilities representatives and fertilizer and phosphate-mining representatives.

Guest seems almost certain that something is in the works, and claims to have his information on good authority. “I know for a fact that they are [in Washington] because I know which congressman they’re meeting up with. I can’t say who it is, but I can say that [a meeting concerning the rider] is going to take place tomorrow,” Guest says. “They’re on the move. When you have that many lobbyists in one place at one time, it’s never good.”

Barbara Riley, Crenshaw’s communications director, says the representative is currently in Washington, D.C., but only because the House is in session. “He has no ‘rider’ regarding pollution limits under discussion with anyone,” Riley says. “The previous amendment was drafted, but never offered in committee and will not be offered at any point moving forward.” Concerning his original rider, which was never introduced due to a cancelled meeting, Crenshaw stated that he only hoped for more time to find “better science.”

Emails to several other rumored supporters of the rider were not returned.

One of the St. Johns River’s most oft-noted polluters, the Rice Creek paper mill of Georgia-Pacific, has made several efforts to lower its impact, regardless of the current lack of nutrient standards. Jeremy Alexander, public relations officer for G-P, says that the Palatka mill is in compliance with Total Maximum Daily Load allocations as adopted by the U.S. EPA for the Lower St. Johns River Basin:

[The compliance] is due, in large part, to the environmental improvement package installed at Palatka that was developed by the U.S. EPA, FDEP and Georgia-Pacific (more than $200 million in capital upgrades that improved effluent water quality). … In addition, [G-P] continues to evaluate additional technologies that could further improve effluent quality including conversations with the SJRWMD focused on additional nutrient reductions.

Regarding reports that Rep. Crenshaw has close ties with Georgia-Pacific, Alexander says that he is “not aware” of any meetings between the congressman and G-P employees.

Eye on Miami Endorses Julio Robaina in the State Senate Primary. By Geniusofdespair

(If you don't see video hit this link)

I am happy to endorse Julio Robaina in the State Senate Primary for District 36. I have known him since he was South Miami Mayor. When I went to meet him ten years ago, he had an Audubon Magazine on his desk, I thought that was a good sign. He is a terrific guy. We don't always agree (Terry Schiavo) but he is always reasonable and respectful. If I were in the district, I could actually vote for him because I never bothered to change my party affiliation. (hit read more for second video)


(If you don't see video here is the link)

Top 10 Reasons Jeb Bush Is Not Running For President. By gimleteye

I Endorse The Three Amigos. By Geniusofdespair

Republicans, I can do without them, but these three are so lovable even though they are misguided on some issues. I guess you could call them moderate Republicans, yes they do still exist. Left to right: State Senate District 36 Candidate Julio Robaina, State Representative Candidate for District 117 Jose Pazos, endorsed by the Miami Herald, and last but least, Whilly Bermudez, running in District 116, who was also endorsed by the Miami Herald. The standouts at the Urban Environment League and Tropical Audubon Candidate's Forum last night were Julio Robaina, Lisa Lesperance and Jose Pazos (Whilly did not participate). The questions were not easy and I was impressed at the intellect of all the candidates involved but they sure didn't do their homework on Amendment 4. All I heard was Chamber crap from all of them. Julio had the best answer, something like "Good Amendment but poorly written." The rest of them tried to explain it and they were pathetic with their misinformation, i.e. one guy said (paraphrased) "Why would you want someone in Pinecrest voting on a land use change in South Beach?" Well, that wouldn't happen with Amendment 4. Gimme a break! Each city has its own CDMP plan. And Lisa said the Amendment 4 elections would cost too much. Are you sure you are a Democrat Lisa? I am not deluded, I know politicians all hate Amendment 4. It is ironic that candidates all want voters to vote for them -- but they don't support what almost a million Florida voters petitioned to vote on.

Amendment 4 aside, in the Republican primary, I endorse all three of the candidates pictured. However, Pazos hedged on reauthorizing the Department of Community Affairs so I am not so happy about that, the other two guys in Pazos' race had even worse positions, they wanted to do away with the DCA. Robaina said he was strongly in favor of funding and reauthorizing the DCA as is Whilly Bermudez. Some advice for Jose Pazos: Listen to Whilly and Julio, they have it right!

I wonder if there are any viable Democrats running in district 36 or 116? Lisa Lesperance is a Democratic candidate running in District 117 who I endorse, but she is not running against anyone in the primary.

Miguel Diaz de la Portilla and Alex Penelas - Are they a pair? By Geniusofdespair

The Miami New Times thinks they have bonded. Franscisco Alvarado says, lobbyist and State Senate hopeful, Miguel Diaz de la Portilla's path to the dark side is complete. He has linked up with the Former Mayor to form a lobbyist dream-team. They ran against each other for Mayor of the County.

Shooter who targeted liberal foundation staff, inspired by Fox News: news The Miami Herald won't print ... by gimleteye

Last week a heavily armed man in California shot by highway police admitted to be en route to start a massacre at the liberal Tides Foundation. Glenn Beck instigated the shooter, according to Media Matters: a story The Miami Herald should report. Maybe someone could find a parallel example of PBS or NBC or McClatchy instigating hatred against the Cato Institute, AEI or Heritage Foundation. If you haven't had enough of Fox News, you don't want to pay attention. (click 'read more')Tides CEO Statement on 580 Incident
Posted by Drummond Pike in Media, Tides on Jul 21, 2010 | one comment

Statement from Tides CEO Drummond Pike

We are greatly dismayed to learn from law enforcement officials that the man arrested over the weekend following a shootout with the CHP had targeted the Tides Foundation for violence. To the best of our knowledge, this person has never had contact with any Tides organization or program. As there is an ongoing investigation into this incident, we will not speculate as to what his motivations may have been.

We are relieved that no one other than the assailant was hurt seriously in the incident, and we are relieved that he was prevented from carrying out his misguided plans, whatever they may have been.

On occasion, the shadow of violence falls on American civic life and it should never be accepted or tolerated. Often, it is encouraged by partisan voices who label activities of which they disapprove by suggesting they are "anti-American" or some other epithet.

This incident serves to remind us that it should be the obligation of every American, especially those whose voices are amplified by the media, to foster civil discourse and dialogue among those who may disagree about public matters. One does not win an argument by inciting unbalanced people to violence. As Americans, we know we are best at solving problems when we reach broadly across boundaries for the best of ideas. Intolerance that closes our eyes defeats our aspirations.

The Tides organizations support innovative, creative nonprofit work to address social problems. We work for sustainability, better education, solutions to the AIDS epidemic, comprehensive immigration reform, and human rights. We strive to encourage every American to be as involved in public life as they can be, and to resolve differences through the honest exchange of ideas.


MEDIA MATTERS
The CA cop shooter and Glenn Beck: Here's what we know
July 23, 2010 1:32 pm ET - by Matt Gertz

On July 18, Byron Williams, an ex-felon with a history of violent criminal behavior, was pulled over by California Highway Police on I-580. Williams, who was apparently intoxicated, opened fire at the officers as one approached his truck. He continued firing as eight additional officers arrived. More than 60 rounds were reportedly fired during the five to eight minute shootout; two officers were reportedly injured by flying glass after a squad cars window and windshield were shattered by gunfire. Williams was arrested and hospitalized with multiple gunshot wounds.

Williams was reportedly heavily armed with a handgun, shotgun, rifle and body armor. Shortly after the shooting, a CHP sergeant said that "There is no doubt in our mind, given the body armor and the extensive amount of ammunition he had, that he was on his way to do a very serious crime against either someone or a group of people" And indeed, Williams reportedly told investigators that "his intention was to start a revolution by traveling to San Francisco and killing people of importance at the Tides Foundation and the ACLU."

The ACLU is a very well-known entity, but the Tides Foundation, which seeks to "promote economic justice, robust democratic processes, and the opportunity to live in a healthy and sustainable environment where human rights are preserved and protected," is much more obscure.

Williams may have been a disturbed individual who was destined to explode. But the question the media should be asking is why he decided to target Tides.

According to his mother, Williams "watched the news on television and was upset by 'the way Congress was railroading through all these left-wing agenda items.'"

We don't know what Williams was watching, or that television played a role in his decision to target Tides. However, if it did, according to our Nexis searches, the primary person on cable or network news talking about the Tides Foundation in the year and a half prior to the shootout was Fox News' Glenn Beck.

According to our searches, since Beck's show premiered on January 19, 2009, Tides has been mentioned on 31 editions of Fox News programs, 29 of which were editions of Beck's show (the other two were on Sean Hannity's program). In most of those references, Beck attacked Tides, often weaving the organization into his conspiracy theories. Two of those Beck mentions occurred during the week before Williams' shootout.

On July 14, Beck said:

You believe that America is the last best hope for the free world. Boy, was I a moron for believing that. Nope, there are a lot of people that believe that we are the oppressor. This man states it. He states in this book "The purpose is to create mass organizations to seize power." Wow! That almost sounds like the Tides Foundation.
On July 13, Beck said:

Well, they have the education system. They have the media. They have the capitalist system. What do you think the Tides Foundation was? They infiltrate and they saw under Ronald Reagan that capitalists were not for all of this nonsense, so they infiltrated. Now, they are using failing capitalism to destroy it.
By contrast, since January 19, 2009, according to our Nexis search, Tides was not mentioned on ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, or PBS. Not once. This search is not perfect -- Nexis does not include, for example, MSNBC's daytime coverage. But the contrast with Beck's coverage is stark.

All of Fox News' references in shows covered by the Nexis database to the Tides Foundation since Beck's show premiered are found below the fold.

On his July 14 program, Beck said:

You believe that America is the last best hope for the free world. Boy, was I a moron for believing that. Nope, there are a lot of people that believe that we are the oppressor. This man states it. He states in this book "The purpose is to create mass organizations to seize power." Wow! That almost sounds like the Tides Foundation.
On his July 13 program, Beck said:

Well, they have the education system. They have the media. They have the capitalist system. What do you think the Tides Foundation was? They infiltrate and they saw under Ronald Reagan that capitalists were not for all of this nonsense, so they infiltrated. Now, they are using failing capitalism to destroy it.
On June 24 program, Beck said:

These are the 1963 communist goals, OK? In 1963, I want to give you just a few of them -- you tell me if they failed.

[...]

Thirty-seven: Infiltrate and gain control of big businesses. What do you think the Tides Foundation is?
On his June 22 program, Beck asked

How about Tides? How about indoctrination? Forget God. It's in George Soros we trust.
On his June 21 program, Beck said of philanthropist George Soros

He also helped start the Tides Foundation, which among its many super, super classics are the anti-capitalist "Story of Stuff," indoctrination video. Yes, George Soros money. Isn't that great? Shown in schools all across America to warp your children's brains and make sure they know how evil capitalism is.
On his May 11 program, Beck said:

You know, last week, I couldn't believe that -- that answer I gave on FOX last week about the Miranda rights, that was off the top of my head. I didn't -- I just got up. I mean, I was up for about 20 minutes while I did this episode.

And even the founders of -- the founder of Tides, remember that? The really shady organization that I'm like -- run for your life, it's Drummond Pike!

Drummond Pike wrote this, "Why I love Glenn Beck." He says, "Beck has just done the right thing, and he deserves praise, even from his rhetorical enemies."

Are you kidding me? It's Tides! I mean, I read that one, I'm like, I should rethink this whole thing.
On his April 29 program, Beck said:

Who's again the Joyce Foundation? Started the climate exchange, seed money. They also give money to the Tides Foundation. Remember those guys? They're great. Oh, that's George Soros.
On his April 27 program, Beck said

We've been telling you all this week about people who will actually benefit from the legislation that is happening now, and cap-and- trade is one of them. In 2000 and 2001, the Chicago Climate Exchange received start-up grants from the Joyce Foundation.

I don't have time to go through this all tonight. I just want to recap this and hold this in your mind. This should be on the front page of every paper. It's such a scandal. I mean, it's - we are really creating just a nightmare of a country.

The Joyce Foundation, which gives money to the Tides Foundation -- John Ayers, the brother of Bill Ayers, Wade Rathke. On the board between '03 and '08 was Valerie Jarrett. She is in the White House now. She was also with the Fed in Chicago at the same time she was on this board.
On his April 26 show, Beck said:

By the way, the Joyce Foundation is bigger than the George Soros Tides Foundation. Yes. It's kind of like that, but bigger. In fact, so big, that the Joyce Foundation funds the Tides Foundation.

If you don't know who the Tides Foundation is, look it up, or refer back to an earlier episode.
On his March 17 show, Beck said:

Here's the audio from George Soros' Tides Foundation.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JACOB HACKER, POLITICAL SCIENCE PROFESSOR: Someone once said to me, this is a Trojan horse for single-payer. And I said, "Well, it's not a Trojan horse, right? It's just right there." I'm telling you, we're going to get there --

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BECK: Got it?

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

HACKER: -- over time, slowly.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BECK: Not a Trojan horse, OK. Tides Foundation, George Soros.
On his March 5 show, Beck said:

Our children are being indoctrinated and it must be exposed. It must end because history has shown us where it can lead. Kids in elementary schools are being taught about cross-dressing, that they shouldn't listen to their parents all the time because their parents don't always know what's best.

They're taught capitalism is evil. Videos like this one are being played in classrooms cross country, made by the George Soros' funded Tides Foundation.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE (video clip): It's the government's job to watch out for us, to take care of us. That's their job.
On his January 25 show, Beck said:

Soros is practically the only investor that is still on board with Obama's bank plan. Why?

Let's follow the circle of influence. The president, our buddy Phil just serving you, Soros -- Soros has the Tides Foundation. He heavily donates to this. It's great. One of the biggest projects in the Tides Foundation that he gives tons of money to is the Apollo Alliance.

The Apollo Alliance, remember him? Creating green jobs -- that's what he did. I mean, we got Jeff Jones here. He's -- well, he was part of the Weather Underground.
On his December 7, 2009, show, Beck said:

Actual coalitions of power. Hello!

And we're counting `em down, all the way up to number 10.

To be successful, we must put in place commitments for hundreds of millions of dollars to be used to finance paid communications and mobilization once the battle is joined. Money, money, money -- the amount of money and number of organizations that they have gathered for this fight is stunning. Tides Foundation. SEIU spend $60 million to elect Obama. HCAN has donated $25 million in the last year to help pass Obama's health care. But they need that money to able to combat the will of the vast majority of the American people.
On his October 29, 2009, show, Beck said:

We've also seen it in the classroom. We've shown it to you night after night, kids are being taught to sing about how Obama is wonderful and how everyone is equal in his sight. Kids are being taught that capitalism is evil and flawed through "The Story of Stuff." It's a video made by the George Soros-funded Tides Foundation.
On his October 5, 2009, show, Beck said:

I don't have a stealthy agenda, but, I'm still called a conspiracy theorist. Isn't that weird? You know, they have a stealthy agenda, but they're not called conspiracy theorists. They're just called community organizers.

How about this? If I had an idea that I cloaked and made it a Trojan horse, I'd be a nutjob or a conspiracy theorist. But when they have a Trojan horse -- no, no, they're not called that. They're called members of the Tides Foundation.
On his October 2, 2009, show, Beck said:

How could you possibly sit on the sidelines when we keep seeing the indoctrination attempts on our children? The anti-capitalist "Story of Stuff" that we showed you this video. It's made by Tides. This audience knows who Tides is.
On his September 25, 2009, show, Beck said:

On top of that, they are now indoctrinating our children. We showed you all kinds of video this week. Start with this one -- "The Story of Stuff."

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Well, let's start with the government. Now, my friends tell me I should use a tank to symbolize the government and that's true in many countries and increasingly in our own. After all, more than 50 percent of our federal tax money is now going to the military. But I'm using a person to symbolize the government because I hold true to the vision and values the government should be of the people, by the people, for the people.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BECK: She followed that with the government's job is to take care of us. No, it's not.

Is telling that to our children, and telling our children that America is a bad place, is paid for by the Tides Foundation and all comes out of Berkeley, California, and it's all over our schools.
On the September 25, 2009, edition of Hannity, Pat Cadell said:

I think it's -- I think it's the most -- I described what it was: cult of personality. It is the same thing driving. We have that video that's been seen by millions of people. The stuff -- you know, the stuff we know or the stuff we learn or whatever. Which is -- which says the country should be represented by a tank, which the Tides Foundation is funding. We had the thing with an NEA. This is not an accident going on.
On his September 24, 2009, show, Beck said:

We don't put our hope in a president, in the individual. We put our hope in God. Now, we're putting it in Obama. He is the only one that can help you, but we're all equal in his sight.

If there wasn't the NEA propaganda, if the Tides Foundation, as we showed you this week, hadn't made an anti-capitalist propaganda video that we showed you - if that wasn't out there, well, then maybe, maybe, maybe, it would just be one crazy teacher.

Fine, I would agree with you. But at what point do we as human beings, as American citizens say, "Wait a minute. What the heck is going on?" This isn't the kind of principles I'm all about. This isn't the kind of principles my neighbors are about.
On his September 23, 2009, show, Beck said:

Now, some of the power that's bringing it all together is an -- is an organization called the Tides Foundation. Their founder is Drummond Pike. He describes the Tides Foundation or Tides Center like this: "Tides was created to provide comprehensive flexible services and tools to those dedicated to lasting progressive social change." "Lasting progressive social change."

And while they do legitimate things, they are also involved in some of the nastiest of the nasty. For instance, these two guys, Wade and Dale. Wade is the founder of ACORN. Dale is the brother. Oh, they're brothers.
On his September 22, 2009, show, Beck said:

I believe, last night, on this program, it was an aha moment for anybody in America that is really trying to just open their mind and figure things out when I showed you this board last night.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BECK: The Apollo Alliance, OK, oh, look, it's ACORN. ACORN founder Wade Rathke is former chairman of Tides Center. That's weird! Rathke was on the Tides board. ACORN, Tides, Apollo, Van Jones, Jeff Jones, Weather Underground uh-oh!

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BECK: And SEIU is on the other side of that. I mean, ACORN, Tides, SEIU -- all these connections, I mean, and we're seeing now how they're all intertwined. The same people keep popping up over and over again. It's pretty eye-opening, but when you combine that with what is being mobilized, I mean -- what's happening? It is absolutely frightening what it looks like is coming our way. I mean, unless -- you know, unless you like France or something worse.
On his September 21, 2009, show, Beck said:

By the way, Tides, in case you don't know what Tides is -- Tides Foundation is with Soros' -- Tides' Drummond pike, the Tides' CEO, he's the treasurer or was the treasurer of Democracy Alliance, also Soros. Tides -- so you know -- is the one that brings us the Apollo Alliance. The Apollo Alliance, that's the one that wrote the stimulus bill. Oh, Van Jones is on the Apollo Alliance board. Oh.
On his September 18, 2009, show, Beck said:

This is a progressive, George Soros-funded, extreme left-wing organization. It's all funded right through the Tides Foundation. It doesn't appear left-wing because, oh, they have all of these credible organizations with it. But what are their real goals?

Wade Rathke with ACORN. His brother Dale -- where is -- where is Dale? Here is his brother Dale is at SEIU -- we think. We're not sure. He was with ACORN, but nobody will give us a straight answer on where he went after embezzling almost $1 million and then George Soros' people at the Tides Foundation come up with $1 million just to make that problem go away. We think he went to SEIU, but nobody will give us a straight -- a straight answer.
On his September 18, 2009, show, Beck said:

I told you that we were going to talk about these things. We were going to talk about Obama, the Left, internationalists, graft, Acorn-style organizations, revolution and hidden agenda. Oligarh -- one letter is missing. Why did I select these words, because Acorn selects Tides, they all select their words first, and then tie them altogether into one word. Oligarch, the only letter that is missing is Y. I don't know what we're turning into an oligarchy, or what we're turning into, but unless you ask why, we're going to transform into something. Ask questions.
From the August 5, 2009, edition of Hannity:

MICHELLE MALKIN: Well, this is the mother of all smear campaigns by the Democrat National Committee and the White House. And this is the way they play. It's the Chicago way. It's hardball politics. It demonized your opponent, stifle dissent.

And it's laughable coming from an organization and a machine that has done nothing but Astroturf state grassroots in support of ObamaCare. And if you want to talk about K Street, let's talk about 1825 K Street. That is ground zero for the Soros and Tides Foundation-funded operation that has failed to put people on the ground to counter a truly grassroots movement among the tea party activists and counterinsurgency of taxpayer groups.
From the August 4, 2009, edition of Glenn Beck:

BECK: OK. So, let me switch gears. And, Phil, let me -- let me bring you in on something else. I have discovered this great little thing called the Apollo project that we've been talking about here, and this just -- boy, it's like a candy store that just never stops giving. Just candy everywhere.

Let -- I just want to go through this with you. Help me out. The Apollo project was started by the Tides Foundation. If you remember Van Jones, he's our green jobs czar, right?
From the August 3, 2009, edition of Glenn Beck:

BECK: The green jobs czar -- let me give this quote. "I was a rowdy nationalist in April 1992. By August, I was a communist. I met all these radical people of color -- I mean, really, really radical communists and anarchists, and it was, like, this is what I need to be a part of."

He's never taken this back. He is the guy who -- his Apollo project is what designed the stimulus package.

MALKIN: That's right. And as you pointed on your show, the word is getting out there on the Internet, underwritten by far-left radicals, like the Tides Foundation. And that's another problem with these czars is that you have these hard left radicals who have an unlimited amount of power to dole out goodies to their friends and to forge a very frightening agenda.
From the July 28, 2009, edition of Glenn Beck:

BECK: OK. And then we have Wade Rathke -- Wade Rathke, who is the founder of ACORN. He was on the board of directors -- if I'm not mistaken -- of the institution that is funding and paying for Apollo, right?

PHIL KERPEN: Yes. He's on -- he was until this year on the board of the Tides Foundation and the Tides Center, which are the parent organizations that host the Apollo Alliance.

BECK: OK. So, Wade Rathke, ACORN, Tides Center, they decide that they're going to fund and create Apollo. One of the founders is the guy who went to jail -- this is during the Rodney King thing -- he went to jail and he was just a black nationalist. He came out a communist and he also then started looking into the green movement, and he is the guy who said, "Hey, if we tie labor and ACORN and Greenpeace together, we've got a super- powerful group, Apollo."

Is it true Apollo helped design the stimulus package?

KERPEN: They did. They put out a draft stimulus bill last year in 2008. It included almost everything that ended up being in the final stimulus bill. Harry Reid has thanked them for helping design the final stimulus package that was enacted into law. And they brag on their Web site that they helped design this thing and push it through.

[...]

BECK: OK. America, I would like you -- I just like to ask you, Barack Obama keeps trying to separate himself from all of these organizations. He's telling us -- he's giving speeches and saying, "I'm one of you, guys; I really am one of you." But then, these organizations, he'll always distance himself over and over and over again from the individuals.

But let me ask you this -- John Podesta, Van Jones, who is now his green jobs czar, an avowed communist, we've got the SEIU, who's in his office once a week talking about labor. They're the ones who were negotiating with all of the health care industry. He's in the Obama's office all the time. Wade Rathke, former founder of ACORN. It all ties to the Tides Center.
On his June 15, 2009, show, Beck said:

BECK: You know, I have told you, for a while now, that this is -- I mean, did you notice some of the names involved here, especially the Tides Foundation. Tides Foundation -- gee, oh, we know them, because they bailed out ACORN. There are people and forces behind some of these things and it is a completely dishonorable debate because they're not telling you the truth -- I'm sorry. We're not listening to the truth. They are telling us, and you just saw what's coming our way.
On his May 21, 2009, show, Beck said:

So who is Drummond Pike, and what is the Tides Foundation? Well, the Tides Foundation is a major source of revenue for some of the most extreme groups on the left. Tides was set up as a public charity that receives money from their donors to be funneled to the recipients of their choice.
From the May 13, 2009, edition of Glenn Beck:

MATTHEW VADUM: Drummond Pike is the founder -- he is the founder of Tides Foundation, which is a shadowy pass-thru, it's like a donor-advised fund. So, for example, George Soros could write a check for $10 million to Tides Foundation, get the tax deduction for it, and then secretly store the money there and then tell them who to write the checks to. The Tides Center and Tides Foundation do that, and then they hand out the money anonymously.
Copyright © 2009 Media Matters for America. All rights reserved.

The Miami Herald agrees with Eye On Miami on Something! By Geniusofdespair

I can't believe I was first on this (see mine yesterday)...Here is the Miami Herald's District 8 endorsement:

"After a distinguished 16 years on the commission Katy Sorenson is moving on. Those vying to replace her are an impressive group: Lynda Bell, 53, a property manager and former Homestead mayor; Eugene Flinn, 48, a lawyer and Palmetto Bay mayor; Albert Harum-Alvarez, 50, a software development consultant; Daniel Marmorstein, 55, a rabbi; Obdulio Piedra, 54, a banker; Annette Taddeo, 43, a business entrepreneur who ran for Congress in 2008.

The choice is tough. The standouts are Messrs. Flinn and Harum-Alvarez and Ms. Taddeo. We hope that she and Mr. Harum-Alvarez will seek other local offices to utilize their talents and ideas.

We believe Mr. Flinn is best suited to continue Ms. Sorenson's progressive, independent service. A moving force for Palmetto Bay's incorporation, Mr. Flinn was elected its first mayor. He is anti-sprawl and pro-green, cooperating with neighboring mayors to create a green corridor to help residents finance energy-saving home features. Mr. Flinn does his homework on issues and has earned his grass-roots stripes with the incorporation movement and working with homeowners on improvement projects, including building a library in his city.

For Miami-Dade County District 8 The Miami Herald recommends EUGENE FLINN."

The Herald really missed the boat with their District 2 endorsement. Joe Celestine is almost as big a loser as Dorrin Rolle. You should have endorsed Mack Samuel or Jean Monestime Miami Herald! But the Herald did get this quote right: "Incumbent Dorrin Rolle has five opponents -- all are head and shoulders above him on integrity and public-service commitment." Harsh by Herald standards, sounds more like one of my quotes.

Eye on Miami Endorses Palmetto Bay Mayor Eugene Flinn for County Commissioner in District 8. By Geniusofdespair

Yes I am choosing Eugene Flinn. I don't have the energy to write a blog about it but I just felt it was time to shit or get off the pot. It was one of the hardest choices I ever made because I like Annette Taddeo and Albert Harum Alvarez as people. I also like Danny Marmorstein, he is a sweet guy and he would drive the rest of the Commissioners crazy as they would have to be nice to him. A lot of them would be afraid they would rot in Hell if they weren't. There might be a new civility there with Danny. I did write a long blog on why I didn't choose one of the other candidates, but what is the point? Yes I know Gene's weak point, he has a temper, I hope he isn't a grudge holder like Sally Heyman, one of those is enough on the County Commission. It comes down to that I just think Gene would do the best job out of all the candidates. I also was disappointed in all the candidates that did NOT show up at the Turkey Point NRC scoping meeting. That was a must -- it was in the district. It is going to impact district 8 big-time. Katy went. The Candidates ALL should have gone. Only Albert and Gene went. Then Albert canceled out this plus when he didn't have the discretion to boycott a Christian Family Coalition (gay bashers) meeting. I am not saying Albert is anti-gay here.

I don't think you can go terribly wrong with your own choice as long as you don't pick Lynda Bell and Obdulio Piedra.

So that is my choice after much soul searching and talking to people I respect: Gene Flinn. Go Gene! There will be a run-off and then I think I will make all my reasoning known. But for now I have one personal message for someone I didn't choose: In religion you follow their rules, in politics you follow OTHER rules: Law. You can't be a proper lawmaker if you don't respect what is legal in these United States. (Photo of Gene Flinn at the Tropical Audubon Annual Meeting.)

Have we been unfair to Obdulio Piedra in his run in District 8 for County Commission? By Geniusofdespair

Yes, I believe we have been harsh in one respect, I don't think he is connected to Natacha Seijas because I just looked closely at his campaign report.

I took his report and compared it with Vile Natacha Seijas's 2008 campaign report. I got tired after entering 131 of Piedra's 279 donations because there wasn't that much going on. These were the only donors they had in common in the 131 entries that I checked:

Carlos E. Martinez
Osvaldo Vento
Javier Salman
Elaine H. Black
John H. Genovese

They like him over at 255 University Drive. He got 8 donations from that address. I think as a banker, he has all these business people to hit up. He even got a donation from realtor Jeannet Slesnick. Comparing to Seijas's report does identify quickly potentially troublesome donations. If Guest Blogger Machado is right, that Obdulio is secretly endorsed by the LBA, then expect those kinds of donations soon.

Here are 2 example of Campaign Contributions I Hate. By Geniusofdespair

All you novice campaign report analysts picking apart the District 8 contributions, there is more to it. Here is a tip: look for the multiples and look at addresses. Below is what I consider a campaign contribution that bothers the hell out of me because we all know the limit is $500. I found this on County Commissioner Dorrin Rolle's report:


Why does it bother me? Coincidentally, the county gave Michael Adler's company, AA Acquisitions, a 240-acre, 70-year lease at Opa-locka airport. He appears thankful to Dorrin Rolle. Below is another thankful group, Dorrin Delano Rolle is now up to $226,610 because so many people are thankful and want to support him. This one also bothers me big-time and I think you all can figure out why:



This is the kind of stuff that should alarm you. Not just a $500 donation from a nasty person.

Miami-Dade County slinks away from pushing off-road vehicles into middle of Everglades ... by gimleteye

You always want to hear the backstory, don't you, about the worst of the hair-brained schemes that either line the pockets or the political fortunes of local county commissioners in Florida. The only agency to support one such scheme-- to allow off-road vehicles in the Everglades-- was the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission whose chairman is Rodney Barreto; a land speculator and board member of US Century Bank. Every other agency (including Collier County's own planning department, ignored by the county commissioners) had issued serious objections to the plan for putting rutting, mudding vehicles in the middle of the threatened Everglades.

Putting off road vehicles in the middle of the Everglades required a vote by county commissioners to change Collier County's comprehensive master plan. The application, leading to the vote, came from Pepe Diaz and the Miami-Dade county commission who were willing to convert the old Everglades jetport site in the middle of the Everglades into a park to spin and churn and blast the quiet. The Collier County Commission-- that initially approved the reckless scheme last spring-- was to make its final vote tomorrow. Last night the MIami-Dade county commission quietly withdrew its application. Why?

It would be interesting to know the entire answer. Is it possible the Miami-Dade and Collier County Commissions came to their senses? I attended the January county commission meeting in Collier where the scheme was first unveiled and made an impassioned plea. Do you think the county commissioners listened to me? (I wrote about that experience for Counterpunch. It was titled, "Fat Tires in the Everglades: A New Place to Ride". You can read it, here.)

No, as much as I would like to take credit on behalf of Sierra Club, or Friends of the Everglades where I am conservation chair, or Tropical Audubon Society, my guess is that the upcoming election was a greater influence on the county commissioners' tactical retreat than the gathering of environmental groups that were girding for a new battle over the jetport that Marjory Stoneman Douglas had fought over in the 1960's, engaging Congress and a president.

For one, the Collier County amendment to its master plan would have been poster child for Florida Hometown Democracy, Amendment 4, on the November ballot. The mutual hand washing by Miami-Dade and Collier county commissioners to exploit the threatened Everglades would eventually have been overturned in court. It would have been a costly diversion and exactly the kind of rabbit hole that lobbyists and insiders thrill to chase civic groups and activists down; an example of misdirection the late Wade Hopping -- Tallahassee lobbyist-- loved to promote. But it would also have highlighted exactly why voters need to take back control of outrageous, irresponsible land use decisions that county commissioners often rubber-stamp to accommodate land speculators whose power is rooted in campaign contributions. Handing Florida Hometown Democracy supporters a cause celebre could not have been judged, a good idea.

Then, under the main tent, there is the US Senate race between Gov. Charlie Crist and GOP challenger Marco Rubio. One of the clearest-- and least reported-- areas of conflict between Crist and the GOP, his former party, is the area of growth management. This issue is the perennial focus of GOP ire: how rules governing growth inhibit economic development, blah blah. Under Crist, the Miami-Dade county commission applications (often led by Pepe Diaz) to push development outside the Urban Development Boundary in Miami-Dade have drawn sharp criticism from the state agency, the Department of Community Affairs. The GOP legislature would love to find a way to decapitate the agency, and despite the worst housing crash in a century triggered by so much crappy, fetid overdevelopment in suburbs, the DCA under Gov. Crist has been a more reliable ally of taxpayers and citizens than county commissions.

Did the Collier County commission and Pepe Diaz in Miami-Dade suddenly wake one morning and realize that their plan to put gas guzzling, buzzing machines in the middle of the Everglades was bad policy, supported by Rodney Barreto, and bad politics, giving energy to Charlie Crist? Or, did they just do the right thing, because it was the right thing to do?

District 8 Campaign Reports. By Geniusofdespair

Campaign Account Summaries:
Albert Harum Alvarez has $56,983.90 - $35,000 loan = $21,893 raised.
Gene Flinn has $40,045.08 - $15,000 loan = $25,045 raised.
Danny Marmorstein has $54,100.00 - $51,000 loan = $3,100 raised.
Obdulio Piedra has $71,830.00 - $500 loan = $71,330 raised.
Annette Taddeo has $153,188.74 - $50,000 loan = $103,188 raised.
Lynda Bell report still hasn't been posted.

I took a quick look at most of the reports. Nothing much there. Candidates usually put the more evil stuff on the last report so I didn't expect too much. Anyway, this will give them money for those mailers. I am wondering why the Biltmore is donating to campaigns when they are going broke and owe money ($500 in kind to Annette Taddeo).

Obdulio Piedra has spent quite a sum on polling and campaign management/literature: $41,612. He has $30,218 left after expenses. The interesting thing is he has Vile Natacha Seijas' former Aide working on his campaign - Esther Monzon-Aguirre. So we do have a Natacha connection here. HOWEVER...when comparing his campaign report to Natacha's I didn't find anything alarming.

Miami-Dade's gift to the nation: "Court under Roberts is Most Conservative in Decades" ... by gimleteye

Every now and again, a news report recalls the Miami-Dade capitulation in the 2000 presidential election. Back then, activists were warned that unless they supported Al Gore full throttle, George W. Bush would control the US Supreme Court for decades. They were wrong and they were right: it didn't matter what activists did or didn't do in 2000. Gore won. The election of the next president at the time was decided by the US Supreme Court, but it was the action of a few counties in South Florida, and in Miami-Dade in particular where local power brokers pushed to halt the ballot recount and thus provided the energy to stop the recount across the state. Miguel De Grandy, for example-- who threw up road blocks to Charter Reform in Miami-Dade and who recently spearheaded the effort in the Florida legislature to obstruct the Fair Districts referendum in in the November state-wide election-- was one of the locals who raced to the Bush offense. A lot of the key Bush supporters in Miami-Dade subsequently pushed and promoted the housing boom and pimped for overdevelopment that lead to the worst economic collapse since the Great Depression. Some got very wealthy. Some lead the Latin Builders Association. Some read this blog. Some still vigorously believe that when the New York Times writes that the US Supreme Court under Roberts is the most conservative in decades, that is an outcome the nation should embrace. And for those who still want to invest, there is Karl Rove's new "grass roots" group funded by oil and gas billionaires. Next time you wonder about the crazy, extreme weather and the failure of government to adapt and stop the worst of climate change, you might want to re-read this post.

July 24, 2010
Court Under Roberts Is Most Conservative in Decades
By ADAM LIPTAK
WASHINGTON — When Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and his colleagues on the Supreme Court left for their summer break at the end of June, they marked a milestone: the Roberts court had just completed its fifth term.

In those five years, the court not only moved to the right but also became the most conservative one in living memory, based on an analysis of four sets of political science data.

And for all the public debate about the confirmation of Elena Kagan or the addition last year of Justice Sonia Sotomayor, there is no reason to think they will make a difference in the court’s ideological balance. Indeed, the data show that only one recent replacement altered its direction, that of Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. for Justice Sandra Day O’Connor in 2006, pulling the court to the right.

There is no similar switch on the horizon. That means that Chief Justice Roberts, 55, is settling in for what is likely to be a very long tenure at the head of a court that seems to be entering a period of stability.

If the Roberts court continues on the course suggested by its first five years, it is likely to allow a greater role for religion in public life, to permit more participation by unions and corporations in elections and to elaborate further on the scope of the Second Amendment’s right to bear arms. Abortion rights are likely to be curtailed, as are affirmative action and protections for people accused of crimes.

The recent shift to the right is modest. And the court’s decisions have hardly been uniformly conservative. The justices have, for instance, limited the use of the death penalty and rejected broad claims of executive power in the government’s efforts to combat terrorism.

But scholars who look at overall trends rather than individual decisions say that widely accepted political science data tell an unmistakable story about a notably conservative court.

Almost all judicial decisions, they say, can be assigned an ideological value. Those favoring, say, prosecutors and employers are said to be conservative, while those favoring criminal defendants and people claiming discrimination are said to be liberal.

Analyses of databases coding Supreme Court decisions and justices’ votes along these lines, one going back to 1953 and another to 1937, show that the Roberts court has staked out territory to the right of the two conservative courts that immediately preceded it by four distinct measures:

¶In its first five years, the Roberts court issued conservative decisions 58 percent of the time. And in the term ending a year ago, the rate rose to 65 percent, the highest number in any year since at least 1953.

The courts led by Chief Justices Warren E. Burger, from 1969 to 1986, and William H. Rehnquist, from 1986 to 2005, issued conservative decisions at an almost indistinguishable rate — 55 percent of the time.

That was a sharp break from the court led by Chief Justice Earl Warren, from 1953 to 1969, in what liberals consider the Supreme Court’s golden age and conservatives portray as the height of inappropriate judicial meddling. That court issued conservative decisions 34 percent of the time.

¶Four of the six most conservative justices of the 44 who have sat on the court since 1937 are serving now: Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Alito, Antonin Scalia and, most conservative of all, Clarence Thomas. (The other two were Chief Justices Burger and Rehnquist.) Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, the swing justice on the current court, is in the top 10.

¶The Roberts court is finding laws unconstitutional and reversing precedent — two measures of activism — no more often than earlier courts. But the ideological direction of the court’s activism has undergone a marked change toward conservative results.

¶Until she retired in 2006, Justice O’Connor was very often the court’s swing vote, and in her later years she had drifted to the center-left. These days, Justice Kennedy has assumed that crucial role at the court’s center, moving the court to the right.

Justice John Paul Stevens, who retired in June, had his own way of tallying the court’s direction. In an interview in his chambers in April, he said that every one of the 11 justices who had joined the court since 1975, including himself, was more conservative than his or her predecessor, with the possible exceptions of Justices Sotomayor and Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

The numbers largely bear this out, though Chief Justice Roberts is slightly more liberal than his predecessor, Chief Justice Rehnquist, at least if all of Chief Justice Rehnquist’s 33 years on the court, 14 of them as an associate justice, are considered. (In later years, some of his views softened.)

But Justice Stevens did not consider the question difficult. Asked if the replacement of Chief Justice Rehnquist by Chief Justice Roberts had moved the court to the right, he did not hesitate.

“Oh, yes,” Justice Stevens said.

The Most Significant Change

“Gosh,” Justice Sandra Day O’Connor said at a law school forum in January a few days after the Supreme Court undid one of her major achievements by reversing a decision on campaign spending limits. “I step away for a couple of years and there’s no telling what’s going to happen.”

When Justice O’Connor announced her retirement in 2005, the membership of the Rehnquist court had been stable for 11 years, the second-longest stretch without a new justice in American history.

Since then, the pace of change has been dizzying, and several justices have said they found it disorienting. But in an analysis of the court’s direction, some changes matter much more than others. Chief Justice Rehnquist died soon after Justice O’Connor announced that she was stepping down. He was replaced by Chief Justice Roberts, his former law clerk. Justice David H. Souter retired in 2009 and was succeeded by Justice Sotomayor. Justice Stevens followed Justice Souter this year, and he is likely to be succeeded by Elena Kagan.

But not one of those three replacements seems likely to affect the fundamental ideological alignment of the court. Chief Justice Rehnquist, a conservative, was replaced by a conservative. Justices Souter and Stevens, both liberals, have been or are likely to be succeeded by liberals.

Justices’ views can shift over time. Even if they do not, a justice’s place in the court’s ideological spectrum can move as new justices arrive. And chief justices may be able to affect the overall direction of the court, notably by using the power to determine who writes the opinion for the court when they are in the majority. Chief Justice Roberts is certainly widely viewed as a canny tactician.

But only one change — Justice Alito’s replacement of Justice O’Connor — really mattered. That move defines the Roberts court. “That’s a real switch in terms of ideology and a switch in terms of outlook,” said Lee Epstein, who teaches law and political science at Northwestern University and is a leading curator and analyst of empirical data about the Supreme Court.

The point is not that Justice Alito has turned out to be exceptionally conservative, though he has: he is the third-most conservative justice to serve on the court since 1937, behind only Justice Thomas and Chief Justice Rehnquist. It is that he replaced the more liberal justice who was at the ideological center of the court.

Though Chief Justice Roberts gets all the attention, Justice Alito may thus be the lasting triumph of the administration of President George W. Bush. He thrust Justice Kennedy to the court’s center and has reshaped the future of American law.

It is easy to forget that Justice Alito was Mr. Bush’s second choice. Had his first nominee, the apparently less conservative Harriet E. Miers, not withdrawn after a rebellion from Mr. Bush’s conservative base, the nature of the Roberts court might have been entirely different.

By the end of her almost quarter-century on the court, Justice O’Connor was without question the justice who controlled the result in ideologically divided cases.

“On virtually all conceptual and empirical definitions, O’Connor is the court’s center — the median, the key, the critical and the swing justice,” Andrew D. Martin and two colleagues wrote in a study published in 2005 in The North Carolina Law Review shortly before Justice O’Connor’s retirement.

With Justice Alito joining the court’s more conservative wing, Justice Kennedy has now unambiguously taken on the role of the justice at the center of the court, and the ideological daylight between him and Justice O’Connor is a measure of the Roberts court’s shift to the right.

Justice O’Connor, for her part, does not name names but has expressed misgivings about the direction of the court.

“If you think you’ve been helpful, and then it’s dismantled, you think, ‘Oh, dear,’ ” she said at William & Mary Law School in October in her usual crisp and no-nonsense fashion. “But life goes on. It’s not always positive.”

Justice O’Connor was one of the authors of McConnell v. Federal Election Commission, a 2003 decision that, among other things, upheld restrictions on campaign spending by businesses and unions. It was reversed on that point in the Citizens United decision.

Asked at the law school forum in January how she felt about the later decision, she responded obliquely. But there was no mistaking her meaning.

“If you want my legal opinion” about Citizens United, Justice O’Connor said, “you can go read” McConnell.

The Court Without O’Connor

The shift resulting from Justice O’Connor’s departure was more than ideological. She brought with her qualities that are no longer represented on the court. She was raised and educated in the West, and she served in all three branches of Arizona’s government, including as a government lawyer, majority leader of the State Senate, an elected trial judge and an appeals court judge.

Those experiences informed Justice O’Connor’s sensitivity to states’ rights and her frequent deference to political judgments. Her rulings were often pragmatic and narrow, and her critics said she engaged in split-the-difference jurisprudence.

Justice Alito’s background is more limited than Justice O’Connor’s — he worked in the Justice Department and then as a federal appeals court judge — and his rulings are often more muscular.

Since they never sat on the court together, trying to say how Justice O’Connor would have voted in the cases heard by Justice Alito generally involves extrapolation and speculation. In some, though, it seems plain that she would have voted differently from him.

Just weeks before she left the court, for instance, Justice O’Connor heard arguments in Hudson v. Michigan, a case about whether evidence should be suppressed because it was found after Detroit police officers stormed a home without announcing themselves.

“Is there no policy protecting the homeowner a little bit and the sanctity of the home from this immediate entry?” Justice O’Connor asked a government lawyer. David A. Moran, a lawyer for the defendant, Booker T. Hudson, said the questioning left him confident that he had Justice O’Connor’s crucial vote.

Three months later, the court called for reargument, signaling a 4-to-4 deadlock after Justice O’Connor’s departure. When the 5-to-4 decision was announced in June, the court not only ruled that violations of the knock-and-announce rule do not require the suppression of evidence, but also called into question the exclusionary rule itself.

The shift had taken place. Justice Alito was in the majority.

“My 5-4 loss in Hudson v. Michigan,” Mr. Moran wrote in 2006 in Cato Supreme Court Review, “signals the end of the Fourth Amendment” — protecting against unreasonable searches — “as we know it.”

The departure of Justice O’Connor very likely affected the outcomes in two other contentious areas: abortion and race.

In 2000, the court struck down a Nebraska law banning an abortion procedure by a vote of 5 to 4, with Justice O’Connor in the majority. Seven years later, the court upheld a similar federal law, the Partial-Birth Abortion Act, by the same vote.

“The key to the case was not in the difference in wording between the federal law and the Nebraska act,” Erwin Chemerinsky wrote in 2007 in The Green Bag, a law journal. “It was Justice Alito having replaced Justice O’Connor.”

In 2003, Justice O’Connor wrote the majority opinion in a 5-to-4 decision allowing public universities to take account of race in admissions decisions. And a month before her retirement in 2006, the court refused to hear a case challenging the use of race to achieve integration in public schools.

Almost as soon as she left, the court reversed course. A 2007 decision limited the use of race for such a purpose, also on a 5-to-4 vote.

There were, to be sure, issues on which Justice Kennedy was to the left of Justice O’Connor. In a 5-to-4 decision in 2005 overturning the juvenile death penalty, Justice Kennedy was in the majority and Justice O’Connor was not.

But changing swing justices in 2006 had an unmistakable effect across a broad range of cases. “O’Connor at the end was quite a bit more liberal than Kennedy is now,” Professor Epstein said.

The numbers bear this out.

The Rehnquist court had trended left in its later years, issuing conservative rulings less than half the time in its last two years in divided cases, a phenomenon not seen since 1981. The first term of the Roberts court was a sharp jolt to the right. It issued conservative rulings in 71 percent of divided cases, the highest rate in any year since the beginning of the Warren court in 1953.

Judging by the Numbers

Chief Justice Roberts has not served nearly as long as his three most recent predecessors. The court he leads has been in flux. But five years of data are now available, and they point almost uniformly in one direction: to the right.

Scholars quarrel about some of the methodological choices made by political scientists who assign a conservative or liberal label to Supreme Court decisions and the votes of individual justices. But most of those arguments are at the margins, and the measures are generally accepted in the political science literature.

The leading database, created by Harold J. Spaeth with the support of the National Science Foundation about 20 years ago, has served as the basis for a great deal of empirical research on the contemporary Supreme Court and its members. In the database, votes favoring criminal defendants, unions, people claiming discrimination or violation of their civil rights are, for instance, said to be liberal. Decisions striking down economic regulations and favoring prosecutors, employers and the government are said to be conservative.

About 1 percent of cases have no ideological valence, as in a boundary dispute between two states. And some concern multiple issues or contain ideological cross-currents.

But while it is easy to identify the occasional case for which ideological coding makes no sense, the vast majority fit pretty well. They also tend to align with the votes of the justices usually said to be liberal or conservative.

Still, such coding is a blunt instrument. It does not take account of the precedential and other constraints that are in play or how much a decision moves the law in a conservative or liberal direction. The mix of cases has changed over time. And the database treats every decision, monumental or trivial, as a single unit.

“It’s crazy to count each case as one,” said Frank B. Cross, a law and business professor at the University of Texas. “But the problem of counting each case as one is reduced by the fact that the less-important ones tend to be unanimous.”

Some judges find the entire enterprise offensive.

“Supreme Court justices do not acknowledge that any of their decisions are influenced by ideology rather than by neutral legal analysis,” William M. Landes, an economist at the University of Chicago, and Richard A. Posner, a federal appeals court judge, wrote last year in The Journal of Legal Analysis. But if that were true, they continued, knowing the political party of the president who appointed a given justice would tell you nothing about how the justice was likely to vote in ideologically charged cases.

In fact, the correlation between the political party of appointing presidents and the ideological direction of the rulings of the judges they appoint is quite strong.

Here, too, there are exceptions. Justices Stevens and Souter were appointed by Republican presidents and ended up voting with the court’s liberal wing. But they are gone. If Ms. Kagan wins Senate confirmation, all of the justices on the court may be expected to align themselves across the ideological spectrum in sync with the party of the president who appointed them.

The proposition that the Roberts court is to the right of even the quite conservative courts that preceded it thus seems fairly well established. But it is subject to qualifications.

First, the rightward shift is modest.

Second, the data do not take popular attitudes into account. While the court is quite conservative by historical standards, it is less so by contemporary ones. Public opinion polls suggest that about 30 percent of Americans think the current court is too liberal, and almost half think it is about right.

On given legal issues, too, the court’s decisions are often closely aligned with or more liberal than public opinion, according to studies collected in 2008 in “Public Opinion and Constitutional Controversy” (Oxford University Press).

The public is largely in sync with the court, for instance, in its attitude toward abortion — in favor of a right to abortion but sympathetic to many restrictions on that right.

“Solid majorities want the court to uphold Roe v. Wade and are in favor of abortion rights in the abstract,” one of the studies concluded. “However, equally substantial majorities favor procedural and other restrictions, including waiting periods, parental consent, spousal notification and bans on ‘partial birth’ abortion.”

Similarly, the public is roughly aligned with the court in questioning affirmative action plans that use numerical standards or preferences while approving those that allow race to be considered in less definitive ways.

The Roberts court has not yet decided a major religion case, but the public has not always approved of earlier rulings in this area. For instance, another study in the 2008 book found that “public opinion has remained solidly against the court’s landmark decisions declaring school prayer unconstitutional.”

In some ways, the Roberts court is more cautious than earlier ones. The Rehnquist court struck down about 120 laws, or about six a year, according to an analysis by Professor Epstein. The Roberts court, which on average hears fewer cases than the Rehnquist court did, has struck down fewer laws — 15 in its first five years, or three a year.

It is the ideological direction of the decisions that has changed. When the Rehnquist court struck down laws, it reached a liberal result more than 70 percent of the time. The Roberts court has tilted strongly in the opposite direction, reaching a conservative result 60 percent of the time.

The Rehnquist court overruled 45 precedents over 19 years. Sixty percent of those decisions reached a conservative result. The Roberts court overruled eight precedents in its first five years, a slightly lower annual rate. All but one reached a conservative result.

LBA Endorsement In District 8. Guest blog by Machado

Well, the endorsements are out. I guess I was not at all surprised that Obdulio Piedra was endorsed by the Latin Builders Association.

I was however most disappointed when I was told that Obdulio requested that the LBA not disclose his endorsement to the voters of District 8.

Perhaps his reason was that he didn't want voters to know where he stands on major development, the UDB and other key issues such as his position to support things like Florida Power & Light's power line expansion.

Apparently, he only wants the news of his endorsement to be secretly given to LBA members, just to help fundraising.

I'm thinking, we all know he is a banker, one we would hope we could trust not to hide information. Is he a wolf county commissioner wannabe in sheep's clothing?

I Sure hope Mimi Planas wins in district 10 race. By Geniusofdespair

Mimi Planas (pictured here with her son), candidate in District 10, has raised $20,718.23 so far in small donations -- mostly $25 each. This past cycle she raised $5,809. Of course, she is going against the big bucks of the Rambling Man, Javier Souto. He has over $200,000 in his coffin...I mean coffers - his donations are mostly $500 each.

Send Mimi money. I implore you District 10: Vote for Mimi. Save the rest of the County from having to listen to one more idiotic, rambling speech by Javier. He is past his prime, put him out to pasture with his cattle. We love Mimi!

Politico does Meek

Good report by Politico on lukewarm support for Kendrick Meek, Democratic candidate for US Senate.
Obama support: Meek so far
By: Jonathan Allen and Maggie Haberman
July 23, 2010 10:48 PM EDT

Black lawmakers are prodding the White House to get more involved in Florida Senate hopeful Kendrick Meek's campaign amid growing concern that less-than-robust backing from President Barack Obama will signal to Democrats that it’s all right to help independent Charlie Crist.

Rep. Alcee Hastings, a Florida Democrat, told POLITICO Thursday that he might not work for Obama's reelection if the president doesn't get into gear for Meek — a four-term House member seeking to become the first black politician elected to the Senate since President Obama won in Illinois in 2004.

"If they do not step up their support for Kendrick, then they cannot expect that I and my allies will support them in 2012," Hastings said, after describing the West Wing's treatment of Meek as "poor."

Hastings and Meek were among a cadre of Sunshine State congressional members who worked against Obama in the presidential races and who stayed with Hillary Clinton until long after it was clear she had no path to victory.

Rep. Barbara Lee, chairwoman of the Congressional Black Caucus, said black lawmakers have made "very clear" to the White House and congressional leaders that black lawmakers expect total support for Meek.

White House officials counter by saying there’s nothing ambiguous about the president’s position: He’s endorsed Meek. And while he's done some work to shore up a handful of incumbent senators in pricey markets around the country, his campaigning for nonincumbents has been almost non-existent so far.

Meek's camp, which otherwise declined to comment for this story, confirmed late Friday that a long-promised fundraiser featuring White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel will be held Aug. 2 — one of fewer than five he is doing for Senate candidates.

Outside of the CBC, few nationally prominent Democrats have been aggressively supporting Meek, leading members of the caucus to press his case with Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee Chairman Robert Menendez (D-N.J.), according to a source familiar with the discussion. Meek was invited to talk to Democratic senators at their weekly luncheon this past week and praised Menendez specifically when he emerged from the room.

And there are some signs of support outside the CBC: Sen. Mary Landrieu, a Louisiana Democrat, hosted a fundraiser for him at her Capitol Hill townhouse at the end of May, according to sources who attended.

The offensive on Meek’s behalf comes at the end of a tumultuous week for the Florida Senate race, as Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) flatly denied a report that he and Crist had back-channel talks about the independent caucusing with Democrats if he wins the Senate seat.

Polls now show Crist with a lead in a three-way race against Republican Marco Rubio and either Meek or his Democratic primary challenger, billionaire political neophyte Jeff Greene. And Meek's fundraising has also lagged that of Rubio, who was the biggest fundraiser of the three last quarter, and Crist, who still nearly doubled the congressman's haul.

Separately, the White House last week tried to keep the president at arm’s length from a racially tinged imbroglio involving the firing of — and subsequent apology to — Shirley Sherrod, a black Agriculture Department official who was fired after an altered video was posted on the website of Big Government, showing her making what appeared to be racially insensitive remarks.

After the White House initially tried to stay clear of the story, Obama was forced to apologize to her after it came out that the edited video was a misrepresentation. Sherrod has been offered a new job at the department but hasn’t yet said whether she will accept it.

The Sherrod episode and the complaints of lukewarm backing for Meek fit "part of a pattern" of the first black president's team repeatedly botching race relations, according to an African-American lawmaker who said it is "outrageous" that Meek hasn't gotten more support from Obama.

"All of us came in for [Obama] when he was running for the Senate," the lawmaker said, referring to the Congressional Black Caucus.

But a White House official strongly denied that there has been any vacillating on Meek, saying, "We support Kendrick."

"As the president has said, Kendrick Meek is his candidate and he fully expects that he will be the next senator from the state of Florida," White House Deputy Press Secretary Bill Burton said. "As we get closer to the election, you can expect the president to campaign in Florida and around the country for Democrats up and down the ballot."

Yet, there's still fear building up among party loyalists that a swath of Democrats are quietly rooting for or quietly open to Crist, who led the potential three-way race with 35 percent to 29 percent for Rubio and 17 percent for Meek in a Public Policy Polling survey released this week.

The calculus becomes easier for Democrats if Greene, a self-funding but flamboyant candidate who's hosted madam Heidi Fleiss as a house guest and had Mike Tyson as the best man at his wedding, wins the primary. In that event, most are expected to turn openly to Crist.

Meek supporters’ frustrations aren’t limited to — or always aimed at — the West Wing, according to a source familiar with the race.

Part of why the frustrations are becoming public — and palpable — is that Meek hasn't appeared to be a huge priority on the list of many prominent national Democratic figures, with few coming in to aggressively help him.

The involvement of former Obama adviser Anita Dunn's firm SKDKnickerbocker with Crist involves not just the former White House communications director, but veteran strategist Josh Isay as the candidate's media strategist. Isay is Sen. Chuck Schumer's former campaign manager and has maintained ties to the New York senator. Jon Ausman, a member of the Democratic National Committee, endorsed Greene recently at roughly the same time he was being paid as a consultant to Greene’s campaign, according to the Associated Press. And Dunn has cut ties to the party machinery for this election because of her firm's work with Crist, although she personally isn't involved.

"It's not so much the White House per se, it's a general frustration that there are a number of Democrats in Washington, in Florida, that are playing footsie with Charlie Crist," the source said.

A black state legislator took to the pages of The Palm Beach Post to make an appeal for Meek this week.

"It is very disappointing, based on recent coverage in The Palm Beach Post, to see Democrats turning their back on their party, believing that the only way to win the Senate seat in November is by supporting a Republican or an independent, especially when the Democratic Party has a formidable rising star in the race who has championed Democratic ideals and values," state Rep. Perry E. Thurston Jr. wrote in a letter to the editor. "When he became an independent, Gov. Crist gifted the Senate seat to Kendrick Meek and the Democratic Party. ... It is very easy for people to say that someone can't win, but they never will win if we don't support our own. I'm reminded of a young man from Chicago whom plenty of people felt couldn't win."

And with no sign that the White House considers aid to Crist or Greene to be an act of treachery, some Democrats are taking that silence as a tacit approval.

Crist took a big political risk — and paid the price within Republican circles — by endorsing Obama's stimulus law in 2009. Rubio used a picture of Crist and Obama embracing to gain traction in the Republican primary, finally forcing the state’s sitting governor to leave the party and launch an independent run, as polls showed the nomination he’d been widely expected to win slipping from his reach.

And Crist would be a hero of many independent voters should he win, a portion of the electorate that will be critical to Obama as he seeks reelection in 2012.

Hastings, though, said that having Meeks in the senate would pay dividends for Obama in the crucial swing state — while Crist would hurt Democrats in redistricting and in the presidential race in two years.

"President Obama is going to be on the ballot in 2012. If Kendrick Meek could win this election, then Obama's election is a slam dunk," Hastings said.

He said Obama should make at least two appearances for Meek in separate cities in Florida before the November election and give him aid now in various forms.

One factor that's highlighted concerns for some Florida Democrats about the White House is the frequent assistance provided by former President Bill Clinton, who has a long relationship with Meek's family and feels deeply loyal to him for sticking with Hillary Clinton's primary so late in the game.

Several black lawmakers told POLITICO that there was tension between Obama and Meek during the 2008 campaign, and some of the president's supporters have noted the irony of Meek backers wanting more out of Obama now.

Meek’s supporters reacted strongly to a POLITICO report earlier this week that Senior Adviser David Axelrod hadn't yet committed the president to campaigning specifically for Meek.

"We're going to campaign for Democrats all over the country," Axelrod said when asked whether Obama will hit the hustings for Meek. Pressed a second time on Meek's race, Axelrod replied "We haven't worked out the whole schedule."

The Obama family plans to vacation on Florida's Gulf Coast in the middle of next month, and the president could raise money for Democratic candidates while he is there.

But Obama generally has limited time and energy to campaign for candidates, and the demand for his help is far greater than he can fill in the stretch run before the election. According to White House figures leaked last week, the president had done or scheduled 24 events for Senate incumbents and candidates. But most of them, including three for Reid, are aimed at holding seats Democrats already control.

Another Democratic source supportive of the president noted that there are CBC members who haven't donated to Meek's campaign.

For now, the Emanuel fundraiser should turn down the temperature.

But Meek has influential voices on his side on Capitol Hill should he need more support in the future.

Rep. Jim Clyburn, the House majority whip and the highest-ranking African American in Congress, said he has been pressing his case with the White House.

"I'm committed to Kendrick Meek's candidacy and I'm working to get support from every quarter I can," he said.

CORRECTION: An earlier version of this story incorrectly said that Crist's fundraising in the most recent quarter had declined from the preceding quarter.


© 2010 Capitol News Company, LLC

County Commissioner Jose "Pepe" Diaz's Campaign Report. By Geniusofdespair

Jose 'Pepe Le Pew' Diaz has raised $264,799.44 thus far to combat Heather Pernas who has a whopping $600 in her campaign account of which she has already spent $425.20. In reality she actually only has $174.80 which is less than .01% of what he has.

I would call this serious, major overkill on the part of Pepe Le Pew Diaz to decimate this candidate.

He got money from many of the usual suspects such as from the Marlins' Jeffrey Loria, his wife and David Samson. Total from Marlins interests $3,500. Homestead Speedway (wants a UDB change) gave as did Lobbyists Chris Korge and Susan Fried. Law firm Greenberg Traurig gave $500 and the Munilla family gave $4,000. Not a very surprising report.