Cougarrific! Assembly Candidate Pursues Unusual Web Strategy

Posted by Roy Edroso at 5:11 PM, July 16, 2008

Paul Newell's campaign for Sheldon Silver's Assembly seat recently got some major press, as mentioned here and here, from local coverage of an unfortunate incident in Silver's career. The candidate's own media strategy is more fanciful. You may recall, for example, the "Obamawitz" image that hit the blogs a while back, portraying the bespectacled candidate in the manner of the famous Obama "Hope" poster.

Now we have found a Newell Facebook page that owes even less to traditional political outreach: Cougars for Newell.

"We think he's just what we need in our government," reads the page description, "a good lookin' young, single, and bold (bald) progressive. Not only is he the Bialystock of the Bowery, Paul has the right kind of touch (caress) and nearsighted vision that will bring a wave of fresh idea to Albany."

We suspected at first that this was some sort of opposition rat-fuck, but Newell campaign manager Evan Hutchison tells us that it is indeed part of the candidate's armament for defeating the powerful Assembly Speaker.

"I've worked Presidential campaigns," says Hutchison (who has served as, among other things, a Regional Director for Wesley Clark in New Hampshire, and as Ohio State Director for Vote Mob), "and a lot of times these constituent groups are total crap. So we sat around thinking up ridiculous names for a group, and settled on Cougars for Newell. It's fun, it has that reference to 'The Graduate' because Paul's kind of a nebbishy kid." (No argument there.) "If you want to turn out young voters, you gotta be creative, show you're not a stuffed shirt."

Cougars for Newell is so far sparsely attended ("Come to the party this Tuesday, June 24," reads the single Wall Post). And few of its 16 members, a peek at the member thumbnails reveals, could be remotely considered cougars (though we understand that Facebook photos can be deceiving). Nonetheless Hutchison calls Cougars for Newell a success, if only for the ancillary merch. "People love the t-shirts," he says, which the campaign has printed to hand out at rallies and give as perks to volunteers.

We should mention that Luke Henry is also running for Silver's seat; we will report on any related joke sites and t-shirts as they become known to us.

Update: Silver Aide's Victim Speaks

Posted by Roy Edroso at 6:45 AM, July 16, 2008

Yesterday we reported on Elizabeth Crothers, the woman whose 2001 rape charges against a top Sheldon Silver aide appeared in both the New York Daily News and the New York Times, and who now publicly supports one of the challengers for the Assembly Speaker's seat, Paul Newell.

Crothers had been tagged as a "Freeper" -- that is, a frequent poster at the hard-right fringe website Free Republic -- by DaBrinker Report, an assertion for which we could find no evident support. (DaBrinker Report has not responded to our enquiry.)

Last night Ms. Crothers sent a message to Runnin' Scared:

"In regards to your July 15 post, you are correct that the anti-Newell site is entirely off-base," said Crothers in an e-mail. "I have never contributed to the 'Free Republic' website and strongly disagree with absolutely everything that site espouses."

Newell's campaign manager, Evan Hutchison, also responded to us. He called Ms. Crothers "courageous" and DaBrinker Report "despicable." Hutchison says he doubts the Silver campaign is directly responsible for the site, and supposes DaBrinker Report "probably involves people who have a stake in Silver staying in power."

In other news related to this race, the Times reported today that "Friends of Sean Patrick Maloney," a fund related to a top aide of Governor David Paterson, has donated $3,800 to the Silver campaign.

Liebermania in the Bronx? Diaz Sr. May Go Both Ways

Posted by Roy Edroso at 7:33 PM, July 15, 2008

Democratic State Senator Ruben Diaz, Sr. (not to be confused with Ruben Diaz, Jr.) is one of the most socially-conservative New York Democrats around. An ordained Minister of the Church of God, Diaz protested last month at the Governor's (court-mandated) order to supply women's underwear to transgendered prisoners who wanted it. He said then that "many people might vote against the Democratic Party" because of it.

Diaz is less concerned about that now: according to the New York Sun, Diaz is letting it be known that he may switch parties in time for the next election -- though, for the time being, he'll be content to run on both the Democratic and Republican lines.

Bronx Republican leader Jay Savino is tickled to have him -- after all, Diaz won his last election 30,184 to 2,453. (His opponent, by the way, ran on both the Republican and Conservative lines.) "We were honored that he came in for a candidate screening and were happy to cross-endorse him," said Savino.

"Mr. Diaz's colleagues say his threat is merely a bid for attention," reports the Sun. Probably -- but he's not making it because he's lonely: the Republicans have a two-seat majority in the State Senate. If the November election leaves the Senate looking anything like a deadlock, a bi-partisan or even (maybe especially) a Republican Diaz would be wonderfully well-positioned to make deals and demands. As a loyal conservative Democrat, he's an inconsequential, outnumbered oddity; as a possible apostate, he's someone other Democrats can never take for granted. As West Bronx Blog spells it out: "Looks like he's trying to pull a Lieberman."

The Sun article mentions a drawback: Diaz's son, Ruben Jr., is running for Bronx Borough President in 2009, and "observers" suggest that if Ruben Sr. ticks them off by switching parties, they'll punish Ruben Jr. come primary time. But to whom are legislators more likely to bow: a politician who cedes power just to gain affection for his son, or one who kicks ass? The examples of political families from the Caesars to the Clintons suggest that the best daddy is one of whom all the other daddies are scared.

Silver Aide's Rape Accuser Backs Opponent, Gets Called a "Freeper"

Posted by Roy Edroso at 4:58 PM, July 15, 2008

Last month, regular readers may recall from Heather Muse's report here at Runnin' Scared, Elizabeth Crothers told the New York Daily News that in 2001 she was raped by J. Michael Boxley, then chief counsel to Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver. Crothers suggested that Silver was more interested in covering his own ass than in helping her.

Crothers also said that she would support community activist Paul Newell (pictured left) in his challenge to Silver in the September 9 Democratic Primary.

This week Crothers reiterated her support of Newell in the New York Times -- in which she was joined by another woman who said Boxley raped her.

The accusation by the second woman, who has not been identified, actually got Boxley nailed on a on a sexual misconduct charge, fined, and put on probation in 2004. (Crothers never filed a criminal complaint, relying instead on an Assembly investigation that went nowhere, she implied, due to Silver's lack of support.)

Silver, who'd expressed "anguish" over Crothers' attack in the News story, found himself obliged to do it again for the Times story. It must give him pause to consider that there are other papers in town.

Perhaps the strangest reaction to Crothers' endorsement came from DaBrinker Report, an anti-Newell site, which posted on July 9:

Elizabeth [Crothers] has her own political consulting shop in California -- which is fine.  But, I have to wonder, does The Albany Project (a major supporter of Newell) know that Progressive Paul's major backer is a political consultant that is a regular "Freeper" (Free Republic" contributor -- an ultra conservative blog)?

The Freeper "Liz," to whose page DaBrinker Report links, does not indentify herself as Elizabeth Crothers, and the anti-immigration posts to which Liz's name is attached ("McCain Proves Amnesty is Political Suicide for the GOP") don't match up well with Crothers' more measured (and signed) posts on the subject at Fox & Hounds Daily ("Immigration brings benefits and costs to California, and we can discuss it with an adult vocabulary.  And immigrants are people, too").

We've requested DaBrinker Report to explain the alleged connection, and are waiting to hear back.

Jesse Helms Finally Dies

Posted by Harkavy at 12:21 PM, July 4, 2008

If we're lucky, he took some of his bitter bigotry with him.

Jesse Helms, an unrepentant supporter of unnatural causes throughout his life, died of natural causes this morning at the age of 86.

The only sign of moderation ever shown by the longtime North Carolina senator was his decision to stop saying the word "nigger" when he was likely to be quoted in public settings.

The death of Helms is just about the best birthday present the United States could wish for on July 4. Free at last — of Jesse Helms.

While the networks and most of the press will soft-pedal his virulent racism and reckless disregard for the First Amendment in his hounding of artists, foreigners and many others, Helms stayed his divisive course until the bitter end — at least until the end of his public career.

After building a reputation as a frankly speaking bigot, Helms ended his public life as a liar who whitewashed those previously bold stands.

In a 2005 review of a Helms autobiography and a Strom Thurmond biography, Michael Lind noted in the Washington Post:

Even though America has undergone many changes since the days when the word "nigger" was freely used, it's vital for us to not ban the word. We need it, in context, to accurately record our history. Black man Randall Kennedy, author of the book Nigger, has argued that point recently in "A Note on the Word 'Nigger' ":

Jesse Helms was such a radical that he was able to fan the embers of prejudice even when he spewed the milder N-word with malice aforethought.

In "Dr. Jim Crow," a 2003 article in the Journal of African American History about the post-World War II desegregation of Southern medical education in North Carolina, Karen Kruse Thomas noted:

The death of Helms, particularly on Independence Day, helps.

And it's fitting that he should die during a presidential race that features young black man Barack Obama.

Whether or not Obama wins, the death of Helms and the ascendancy of people like Obama represent at least some sign of progress in America.

From the Voice's Bush Beat

Democracy Dot Com: The Left Shoots Back

Posted by Harkavy at 9:44 AM, June 16, 2008

New report on talk video spells doom for talk radio's influence.

Video's killing the rock-ribbed-conservative stars, if a new survey on the Internet and politics is true.

YouTube, in other words, is sending Rush Limbaugh down the tubes.

Right-wingers dominated the air waves for decades and were the early users of the Internet, compared with lefties, as I noted nearly a decade ago in the Voice in "Left Behind".

Now the left has overtaken the right. Also endangered are the establishment's talking-head TV shows, like the one Tim Russert hosted.

Click here for the Bush Beat post and read on . . .

Illinois Passes Presidential National Popular Vote Bill

Posted by John DeSio at 6:15 PM, April 9, 2008

Though a bill that would bind New York’s votes in the Electoral College to the winner of the presidential popular vote has not moved in Albany, Illinois is the latest state to embrace an idea that has the potential to reshape the way we choose our president.

Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich signed a law earlier this week that will require Illinois to elect the president using the National Popular Vote. The move, which has won approval in New Jersey and Maryland, would prevent a repeat of the 2000 presidential election should it be approved in all 50 states.

Illinois is the 16th state to pass such a bill. In 2000 George W. Bush, despite his defeat in the popular vote to Al Gore by roughly 500,000 votes, was victorious after having won enough states through the Electoral College, including a hotly contested Florida race, to clinch the presidency.

“It is rare that we see such a sweeping reform move so swiftly,” said Common Cause President Bob Edgar, whose organization is a driving force behind the legislation. “Legislators are clearly picking up that citizens want every vote to count equally for president and that the candidate who gets the most votes should win.”

Tony Avella is Mad as Hell (And Running for Mayor)

Posted by Julie Bolcer at 11:30 AM, April 2, 2008

Days before City Councilmember Tony Avella (D-Queens) officially declared his candidacy for mayor on Sunday, he released a video in which he compared his position to that of Howard Beale in the 1976 film, Network. The character, a ratings-challenged news anchor turned anti-corporate crusader portrayed by Peter Finch, famously exhorted his audience to put their heads outside their windows and scream about the state of affairs, “I’m mad as hell, and I’m not going to take this anymore!”

Cynical media executives became happy to keep Beale on the air so long as he attracted viewers, provided that his outbursts posed no real harm to the corporation.

Similarly, while an Avella candidacy could inject some welcome alternative perspectives into the mayoral race in 2009, the question remains whether he can deliver more than token opposition to presumed top-tier Democratic candidates like Comptroller William C. Thompson, Jr., Congressman Anthony Weiner and City Council Speaker Christine Quinn.

Fueled by the slogan, “The revolution starts … now!” Avella summarizes his underdog candidacy with three prongs. He wants to lower taxes for all New Yorkers, reform the Department of Education and stop the overdevelopment that is damaging the unique character of the city’s neighborhoods.

Regarding one major example among the last platform, Avella explained his opposition to the $ 4 billion Atlantic Yards project for Brooklyn within a voicemail he left in response to a call for comment on Monday.

“I am totally against the Ratner Project,” Avella said. “I think it is a perfect example of the overdevelopment that is going on in this city, of putting ten thousand potatoes in a five-pound bag. The traffic, the overburdening of the subway system and the transit system in that area would just be enormous. Plus the fact of the misuse of eminent domain – that is something that absolutely has to stop in this city, of taking somebody’s private property and giving it to a private individual, in this case Ratner, so that they can make money from it. That is the most undemocratic situation and process that I’ve ever heard of,” he concluded before he hung up.

Characteristically, his opinion stands out in the potential field of leading Democratic mayoral candidates who support the project.

Avella, 56, seems to have carefully cultivated a maverick reputation as the representative for the 19th District in Northeast Queens including Bayside, Whitestone and College Point since 2002. During his tenure, he has burnished his good government credentials through his refusal to vote for a pay raise for Council members, and for his rejection of the $8,000 “lulu” to which he is entitled as chair of the Zoning and Franchises Subcommittee.

Recently, Avella garnered attention when he called for buildings commissioner Patricia Lancaster to resign in the wake of the East Side crane collapse on March 15 that killed seven people. He also introduced legislation in December that would ban horse-drawn carriages in the city on the grounds of cruelty and risk to the animals posed by traffic.
Although his stances may have endeared him to animal lovers and preservationists, those positions could lead Avella to face an uphill battle in raising campaign cash from the city’s powerful interests like the real estate lobby. Fundraising reports filed in late January show him with a total of $180,000 raised, far behind Thompson ($4.2 million), Weiner ($3.7 million) and Quinn ($2.4 million).

Not that a little thing like money should deter a prophet.

Bringing the National Popular Vote to NY

Posted by John DeSio at 1:09 PM, January 7, 2008

The New Jersey legislature passed a bill last week that would essentially destroy the Electoral College, giving the presidency to the candidate who wins the nationwide popular vote. A similar bill has been introduced in Albany, but it's looking like a legislative long-shot—at least for now.

So far the National Popular Vote plan has been approved in Maryland and awaits the signature of the governors of California, Hawaii and Illinois. The Garden State has approved a plan that would bind the state’s votes in the Electoral College to the candidate who wins the national popular vote for president but the bill is also awaiting the signature of Gov. Jon Corzine. The law would only take effect once enough states to comprise a majority of electoral delegates, 270, pass a similar law.

“Electing our President using the national popular vote makes sense,” said Bob Edgar, president of the good-government group Common Cause, which has been the chief supporter of the National Popular Vote movement. “It would ensure that every person’s vote counted equally and that our leaders would be accountable to the nation as a whole, not just voters in a handful of swing states.”

That means New York would matter, should the plan be approved in enough statehouses. The overwhelming Democratic advantage in New York State makes it almost impossible for any Republican, even a local boy like Rudy Giuliani, to consider a victory here. The last Republican to win New York was Ronald Reagan in 1984 as part of his national landslide. Since then Republicans continually refused to waste time and money fighting Democrats in the Empire State, acceding New York and its electoral votes to the Democratic nominee. In 2004, John Kerry defeated George W. Bush by more than 1.3 million votes in New York, a strong Democratic romp rendered meaningless by the larger process.

But what if every vote was in play, and Bush had to spend time in 2004 campaigning upstate to bring out more Republicans? What if Kerry had to push for higher turnouts in the heavily Democratic five boroughs to offset Bush’s northern gains? What if New York mattered? Bronx Democratic Assemblyman Jeffrey Dinowitz is one of a handful of sponsors of New York’s version of the National Popular Vote act, and the only sponsor from the five boroughs. He noted that it would require an overhaul of the Constitution to officially eliminate the Electoral College. This plan, said Dinowitz, would avoid the considerable hassle of a constitutional change.

But it would also make New York, and every other state in the Union, no different than Pennsylvania, Florida and Ohio, the three “swing states” that see the most campaign action each presidential year as a result of the Electoral College. Win two of these three states and you’re likely to be the next president, since party advantages in the remaining 47 states make them uncompetitive. Dinowitz said he is tired of the voters in larger states like New York, California and Texas being taken for granted.

“We’d be giving the candidates an incentive to campaign outside of the swing states,” said Dinowitz. “If this was the law, they would go all over the place. They’d have to campaign all over the country.” Whether the bill would pass is anyone’s guess. Albany sources indicated that little thought has been given to the proposal’s merits due to numerous other legislative concerns, and even Dinowitz admitted that he did not push very hard last year to bring more sponsors on board. “This is going to take a while,” said Dinowitz, adding that getting enough states to approve the bill will be difficult even before the 2012 elections, and certainly not sooner.

The law, had it been in effect in the past, would have changed the course of history. In 2000, then-Vice President Al Gore defeated Bush in the popular vote by a little more than 500,000 votes, yet Bush won enough states, including a highly controversial victory in Florida, to ensure his victory in the Electoral College. The result, one of the four times the popular vote winner lost the presidency, did not sit well with Dinowitz, though he admits that he would have been just as upset had a Republican candidate lost the presidency despite winning the popular vote. What’s right is right, he said.

“Whoever heard of a democracy where the person who comes in second wins?” asked Dinowitz. “It’s crazy.”

Campaign Finance Board Fines Barron, Palma and Four Others

Posted by Michael Clancy at 3:02 PM, October 11, 2007

The Campaign Finance Board fined city Councilmen Charles Barron and Larry Seabrook for violating campaign finance law in the 2005 council election. Councilwoman Annabel Palma got socked with a $30,000 fine for violations in the 2003 race.

Palma, who received $93,750 in public money, accepted over-the-limit in-kind contributions from Local 1199 of the Service Employees International Union, the board found. She was fined $10,000 for accepting the in-kind contribution from SEIU for a get-out-the-vote campaign, $10,000 for failing to report it, and another 10 grand for misrepresenting the union involvement in her campaign.

Barron, who received $141,077 in public funding, was fined $1,250 for keeping an excess of cash and for improperly documenting his expenditures.

Seabrook, who received $71,000 of taxpayer money, was fined for $500 for trying to push through $9,782 of non-campaign related expenditures including items of lasting value, such as laser printers and custom-made office furniture, for his local political clubhouse, the Northeast Bronx Community Democratic Club.

Though Seabrook did run his campaign from that club some of the items in question, such as the furniture, were delivered the day before the election, the Campaign Finance Board found. Seabrook faced only nominal opposition in the race.