Present at the creation of a new political/media paradigm, etc.

Thank you, Jane, for explaining how the winners won, and why.

Those who came up short can read this post and figure out how to be the next Fire Dogs. As can their supporters in our community!

Congratulations to the winners, good mentors all. Let’s see some folks emulate their success in Round Two.

Thanks Jane.

What Teddy Said!

The dogs, the dogs, the dogs are on fire!

Well thank goodness the top dog, Kucinich.. actually scored best on the fdl scorecard.

Thanks, Teddy. I think this contest, and what Grayson has done with online fundraising, has changed the way a lot of members are thinking about the online community.

They’re getting the idea that time spent making their case on the blogs is better than time spent at lobbyist fundraisers that they’re just going to take shit for, but it’s an ongoing effort to build those relationships. You can’t just show up when you need cash.

I remember Kucinich when he was mayor of Cleveland back in the 70s.
He was a nutcase then, and he still sounds like one ‘most’ of the time.
Oh well, we can’t always be stuck in the real world.

Nice dog, Scarecrow. I have one just like your Walden and, yes, all Gordons do like to look right through you.

I love this. Not only are you trying to influence and lobby the Congress but you are TEACHING THEM how to communicate and get their issues out.
and there is a carrot — support and money.

liberation from PAC corporate tyranny? what “member” wouldnt luv dat?

Glad Kucinich the most consistent progressive stayed in the lead. Sorry to see the other consistent progressive Grijalva fall back to 8th.

I have found that Republicans, Dems and Independents alike voice strong support for DK’s consistently progressive values and votes…nationwide

I’m rather dumfounded by the number of votes that folks like Heath Shuler and Baron Hill received.

But they were nominated so someone in their districts felt they were worthy as did the folks who voted for them.

Grijalva!!!

: )

If people are already organically chattering, that means something, but it doesn’t last long if you don’t feed it. These Reps know how to work that successfully.

Indeed. Every single day, the repubs read the same script and run to the cameras and the microphones to repeat it. That’s why their foolish ideas are out there. When was the last time you saw two democrats say the same thing on the same day? They act like if you say it once, everyone knows it and it would insult them to hear it again. No one knows where the party stands, because no one ever talks about it.

A fine read, thanks Mz. Hamsher, per all Teddy P and others said.

Aside from the details you explained about the process behind the scenes, I guess ONE thing really stands out for me:

“Getting members of Congress to start thinking about the blogs in a different way by demonstrating to them all, right now, that we know how to help our friends is a really important step in turning things around.”

Nice.

What was shocking was learning that thru FDL outreach to House Offices as part of this contest we all find out that too many of the reps and their staff have NO CLUE as to how to use, work, or interact with the blogosphere and online community!!!!!

Perhaps stuck in the same mentality that dictates “Oh, if you’re not in our district, we can’t take your call.”

Never MIND that folks OUTSIDE their districts might give them money and lend support for their causes!!!!

Sad, but now enlightening to us readers . . . as FDL has exposed it . . . they are behind the times!!!

Nobody was more surprised than me. After a couple of calls I realized we had to scale things back to the training wheels stage.

I always figure members of Congress know this stuff, they just don’t bother. Wrong!

Congratulations to the winners, but more importantly to Jane Hamsher and the FDL community for building and supporting this Democratic and progressive infrastructure.

I look forward to the day when Fire Dogs outnumber Blue Dogs in the House and Senate.

- Tom

Nice, I got two out of my three, but it might be nicer is that list of dogs included a good bitch (in the best sense of the word, please). I voted for wonderfully fiery populist Marcy Kaptur in addition to Kucinich and Grayson.

I don’t understand why FDL doesn’t use its resource to engage in *real* constructive activism – you know, like die-ins or giant puppets or something – instead of just doing nothing but snipe snipe snipe. /snark

“I look forward to the day when Fire Dogs outnumber Blue Dogs in the House and Senate.” YES!!

110610 lots of new visitors to FDL. Friends that I have been trying to get to this site paid a visit during this voting process. A good thing.

Jane and team thanks for all of your work.

Hoping the next three winners will reflect progressive values across the board

I guess I can understand the nominations of those folks. We see them as pulling the Democratic House caucus to the right, sometimes fatally. But for Nancy Pelosi, they will always be her and Rahm’s “majority makers.” And despite their BlueDogginess, their Democratic — and maybe some GOP — constituents probably prefer them to the alternative.

I know people here get down on me because I like to talk about the ‘alternative’ as always a GOP. Believe me, I’ve lived in swing districts in Virginia and North Carolina. The difference, for working people and for lower class people, between a Democratic representative and a GOP in those districts is vast.

I really do understand the swing-district Democratic voters’ dilemma: they are never going to have a progressive representative, and they’d actually probably prefer a Heath Shuler or a Baron Hill to a GOP.

Who said all politics is local? Why — I believe it was Tip.

Yes, who among his supporters will take the time and energy required to sit down with his campaign staff and describe what happened here? Who among the Firepups will be his consistent advocate as we build to Round Two? Who will get other folks to diary his advantages, present his virtues, and explain the reasons he should WIN next time?

What was shocking was learning that thru FDL outreach to House Offices as part of this contest we all find out that too many of the reps and their staff have NO CLUE as to how to use, work, or interact with the blogosphere and online community!!!!!

Indeed! All the more reason to give deep thanks, congrats, and help to Jane to keep this movement growing. The better congresscritters will learn or delegate the details, and use what they learn at the Lake to become more effective by far.

I don’t know how you can possibly juggle so many things so effectively, and with such grace, (((((Jane)))))! We all are the better for it, as are so many who still don’t even have a clue what you do. Watching a CHAMP at work, and actually having a clear opportunity to help. Let’s go git it done. There IS NO QUIT at the Lake. Thanks all!

What Teddy said.

Even this long-in-the-tooth tiger shepherd can learn new things.

I contacted the office of one rep, but no one ever got back to me. Talk about a missed opportunity!

Well said, Teddy. Learning experiences are good.

Another adorable pupper on da front page. Firepups sure do know how to pick winners. Gonna miss seein’ those faces every day.

Yes! What a sweet face. He probably gets away with bumming his way onto laps. Ya think? heh.

How nice…you have rewarded three Reps who have plenty of money(Grayson being one of the wealthiest congressman in the US Congress) or Reps who do not need cash to win because they are in safe progressive districts. Not to progressives in hard districts, not to progressives in primaries in Blue Dog districts, and not to new potential progressives willing to take on the GOP. Only proves Jane that talk is cheap, contest is fun but when the rubber hits the road lots of progressives in the blogosphere are great at contest, and complaining but like a more incestuous approach to rewarding those in the trenches.

Right on, sister…

When are the three so-called “progressives” on MSNBC, Keith, Rachel and Ed, going to start telling us about the vile history of American corporate imperialism and interventions in third world countries for the last one hundred and twelve years? Our imperialism began in the Philippines back in 1898 with the slaughter of hundreds of thousands of Filipinos who dared to resist US colonial occupation…

my goodness me! here. have a breath mint. no charge.

I suspect she could use the money too.

Good for you for trying!

I wonder if the campaign office is the place to start, though, rather than the Capitol Hill office. Some ‘critters might be strict about keeping efforts of serving constituents separate from efforts of raising money for their re-election. Some maybe not so much.

Also, if anyone wants to put together a Seminal diary on all the steps they took for a successful winner, both as an ‘outsider’ and to document the ‘inside’ steps the campaign organized, that would probably be very helpful.

Let’s not wait until the starting pistol goes off the next time: use this intermission to recoup, reorganize, reconnoiter, and regroup.

hee hee

Well, good for Dennis…and, I guess, Grayson, although Matt Taibbi has given us fair warning about the degree to which he has a screw loose.

But I’m very sorry to see Weiner on the list. Eric Massa, unlike Weiner, faces serious opposition and is a true progressive. I’m afraid too many Firepups assumed too much based on Weiner’s welcome but aberrant position on health care. In other issues of major importance to progressives — especially war, peace, and terrorism — he’s a craven neocon attempting to follow Chuck Schumer’s career trajectory.

The wonderful democratic-small-d aspect of the Act Blue platform is that anyone can set up fundraising pages for candidates, or incumbents, they believe are deserving. Anyone can organize fundraisers on their own pages for their own favorites, and diary about these fundings across the blogosphere, in diary-allowed websites like FDL’s own Seminal, as well as DailyKos, MyDD, and OpenLeft.

Jane didn’t wake up one day with her big megaphone full of FDL supporters and her complicated rolodex full of contacts. Anyone can be that person now.

Try it, I’ll bet you’ll surprise yourself and us.

KUCINICH!

(champagne corks popping)

These three incumbents have shown the others how the game’s played. It’s time for those who fell short to examine what worked and how they can do better next time. And it’s a perfect time for those who support the incumbents who fell short to map out a campaign to win: alliances, lists, organizations, networks can all be knitted together and made ready to go when the next starter’s pistol sounds for Round Two.

What have you done today to help Eric Massa come in first place next time? Ask yourself that every day and he will win.

Probably when the corporate imperialists stop paying their salaries.

Thank you Jane. Your way IS the highway.

Progressive Police: Conservatives and slower traffic, please remain in the right lane. The left lane is for passing and faster traffic only. Please move to the right lane and turn off your blinker. blocking traffic is illegal and subject to imprisonment and/or a fine. Thank you.

I’m newbie in her district. She’s got gobs of solid local support, and for good reason. Doesn’t mean you couldn’t help her if ya want. Just being a highly-regarded also-ran in the fire-dog race speaks to quality, eh?

Her House seat used to be held by one Sherrod Brown, now serving in the Senate. Perhaps you have heard of him. ;->

That’s a pretty nonsubstantive response, Teddy. I’ve donated to and attended rallies with Massa, and gave to Grayson when he first started giving the Rethugs hell. And I pitched Massa in the comment threads to this vote. I’m not sure of the life of luxury you imagine I live to be able to lend tangible support to Massa every day.

But Weiner, who’s been my congressman, deserves a progressive primary challenge, not a donation, from anyone interested in, say, preventing an attack on Iran.

INDEED! *tip of the glass*

I met Eric Massa when he ran the first time, I donated to his campaigns more than once, and I would like to see him win Round Two! But I know that the best way for his supporters to organize and win is NOT to trash winners of Round One, but to emulate their methods and out-organize the other nominees.

Stewing about losing isn’t a winning strategy. It just isn’t. And you are incorrect if you think I make any assumptions about anyone’s capabilities to contribute. I’m sure you’ll do everything you can to ensure a Massa win. We may be on the same team then!

You win the internet for today. :-)

What have you done today to help Eric Massa come in first place next time? Ask yourself that every day and he will win.

teddy, wtf?

you believe in magical thinking now? or have you been smoking something good? if this was true, the wars would have ended, we’d all have healthcare and climate change would be addressed.

seriously, platitudes just piss me off like any other kind of dishonestly.

But I know that the best way for his supporters to organize and win is NOT to trash winners of Round One, but to emulate their methods and out-organize the other nominees.

oh, my bad. now i get it. that’s why we NEVER trashed cheney or bush.

Took the words right out of my mouth!

You missed this, Selise:

I met Eric Massa when he ran the first time, I donated to his campaigns more than once, and I would like to see him win Round Two! But I know that the best way for his supporters to organize and win is NOT to trash winners of Round One, but to emulate their methods and out-organize the other nominees.

Stewing about losing isn’t a winning strategy. It just isn’t. And you are incorrect if you think I make any assumptions about anyone’s capabilities to contribute. I’m sure you’ll do everything you can to ensure a Massa win. We may be on the same team then!

As Teddy noted, this is just the first Fire Dogs contest. There will be others. Take what you’ve learned and be ready to implement this knowledge. What these three congresspeople did wasn’t that difficult — it just required thinking outside of the box, which is something that progressives are supposed to be good at, no?

Cheney and Bush are Fire Dogs?

selise, wtf?

are you drinking again?

how does it feel to be accused of same?

really, your lack of constructive engagement is absolutely appalling.

It occurs to me that the criteria for selecting candidates for FDL/Progressive support aren’t adequately focused. I would prefer a much longer list of criteria, perhaps as many as twenty items, with each item carrying a score/value. In this way, we would end up supporting candidates with the highest progressive values; AND……..some otherwise not well-known, but *highly committed*, progressive politicians, with great potential for us, some in need of funds, some not……would get our full-throated support. It’s also possible other websites, using a similar system, would make like evaluations…..what an attraction that would be for politicians to pay attention to us!

Plus it has the added attraction of weeding out DINO’s and other weaklings………

If you are planning on fighting to keep Anthony Weiner around, this whole project seems basically pointless unless its just another disguised corporate astro-turf job. Thats what you will be essentially doing. If you fight to keep corporate democrats in office you will continue to be sold out. What a joke. Weiner…are people that blind to MSNBC propaganda that they actually mistake Weiner for a progressive?

Or is it the ever so amazing “Jon Stewart was my roommate” seal of approval?

What a sad, sad joke. I’ve lost a little respect today for FDL as a whole.

Mutual, be assured.

“your lack of constructive engagement is absolutely appalling.”

Pot, meet kettle.

Do you understand that these candidate-incumbents were ALL nominated by their own constituents? That’s where this started. And that people could vote based on whatever criteria they liked? Even though FDL Action provided three columns of criteria (which very few candidates but the winner got check marks in, you’ll notice) nothing will prevent you from organizing for your preferred candidate for Round Two.

In fact, today’s a great day to get started if you have a favorite. Contact the congressmember’s campaign office, let their new media people know about the contest, get an email address and provide some information to them about the contest. Then consider writing a Seminal diary about your preferred candidate, and organizing the commenters there to activate their own networks, organizations, and lists while you get your own in gear.

This is online political organizing 101 — but Congressional campaigns don’t seem to know how to do it. You can be their liaison to the next Fire Dog Round, and you can help your candidate win.

Agree with Teddy — if we wanted to tell people who to pick we would’ve just picked them ourselves. Not the point. We wanted members of Congress to campaign. We want them to think about how to please this community. It’s a long-term process.

If you’re someone who is never pleased, your ability to influence them is going to be nil. So if you want someone to win, campaign for them. But suggesting that we should be more dictatorial defeats the purpose.

You want them to do better in Round 2? Go to work. We work hard. It’s not our job to do the work that leads to the results you want. That’s your job. Go call the offices of the congress people you want the community to support, get them to start posting and engaging and make it happen.

Nobody follows a whiner.

Name-calling kind of reduces your pot/kettle argument, doesn’t it? Especially the adhominem charges against this contest’s organizers and winners.

Think about it: do you want to back a winner in the next round? Or do you want to trash this round’s winners? Each is a possible path, but only one path actually raises money for your preferred incumbent.

I agree with Jane.

I don’t think anyone here wants to engage constructively anymore.

Perhaps it’s simply time to close comments on this thread. Anyone who wants to congratulate people has had a chance to do so, and those who hang around are simply trying to get a rise out of people. Those who want to figure out how to win next time have all the information they could possibly need.

There’s no reason for us to continue to engage the naysayers, bitchfesters, or adhominem attackers.

………..responding to Teddy Partridge @52:

Teddy, perhaps I didn’t look closely enough, but I saw only three criteria listed (or were these only the commitments required?). However, I think that the criteria of voting “based on whatever criteria they liked….” not only doesn’t sift out the less desireable candidates, but also doesn’t recognize candidates with healthy progressive credentials or positions…..at least not adequately.

I don’t have a favorite candidate in my state (Rhode Island), but I’m working with a PDA group to find out who and where they are, local, state and national, and then to help each of them engage the public with their progressive notions.

Nominating “whomever we like” isn’t a good criterion; Grayson, while I’m impressed with his outspokenness, seems to be in AIPAC’s pocket; if Weiner is inclined to storm Iran, then that’s bad news for our support mechanism.

The first round FDL system lent some support in questionable places……and left out a whole bunch of highly deserving candidates.

That said, Dennis Kucinich is a champion.

Run your own goddamn campaign then. Clearly this one doesn’t meet your high standards. Let us know how it goes, please. Or not.

I think that’s a constructive recommendation. Not every candidate will pass muster on every issue; one can only shoot for percentages and weight those issues that one holds most dear. But a comprehensive scorecard of that sort would help flag the more egregiously problematic candidates like Weiner.

The main lesson from Round One, apart from the undisputed awesomeness of Dennis the K, is that campaigning can push less deserving candidates ahead of more deserving ones, here as in the wider world.

But better backgrounders, as you suggest, could make for better decisions.

how does it feel to be accused of same?

i thought your statement defending a warmonger from being called out astounding and would have felt worse not saying anything. but, if my “smoking” comment bothered you, i apologize for it and won’t do it again. i do think you still owe me an apology for attacking my integrity and honesty for no good reason. that one is hard to forget, and i suppose it has affected how i interpret your comments. or have i gotten nice teddy and mean teddy confused again?

One criteria which is implied but not specified is that the recipients of these FDL funds should be effective agents for the important causes they support. According to this criteria DK and Grayson do seem to have tangible results for their efforts whereas Weiner not so much.

Is there any tangible results that Weiner can point to that would merit his receipt of financial support?

breath mint…hahaha..how very purity GOPlike of you.

hee hee?

I prefer the old fashion way..you know getting off my ass and walking the precinct..knocking on doors…going to ward meetings, party caucuses…working phones and the like…for progressives since 1966 and YOU?

Very good point, some absolute criteria including tangible results would help voters choose and identify worthy candidates. It would also force candidates to show something for their efforts and be dogged in pursuit of results.

Does your mom know you talk this way?

Very scary to see how close to the top Barney Frank placed.
Does anyone really believe Barney represents the best of the Democratic party when it comes to controlling big banks?

Jane – nice job! But I guess you can’t win.

Throwing open a poll which lasted just a few days, getting over 100,000 response/opinions when the usual Gallup sample is about 1,000 people, and letting the community at large deliver a result, and people are pissed!

Imagine if you had just DECLARED some Firedogs; after all, it’s your blog and you could have.

Keep doing it – people will eventually catch on. I really appreciate all you guys at FDL do.

Great points great suggestions. Check out how far ahead Dennis was before Grayson, Weiner caught onto Dennis sending out his email and added extra efforts in some other realms.

I do hope folks will really consider looking at the candidates with a wider scope. Not just how they have voted on a few issues. Kucinich’s voting record setting the bar

Suggestions for Round 2:

1) Skip the nomination part of the process. The way it was set up, many of us couldn’t nominate anyone because of where we live AND the end result was a list that included the likes of Bart Stupak and that led to a lot of annoying questions about why certain members of Congress were on the list at all.

The Congressional Progressive Caucus has about 80 members. It includes many members of Congress who would make fine Fire Dogs and who could be helped by having our support. Why not let everyone vote for three from among its members?

2) Decide whether you want this contest to be a search for the most perfect progressive ever (I’d say that’s not the point of this contest!) or an effort to help progressives in Congress who can use it most. Should the point of the contest be to reward the ones who’ve been the best progressives, or should it be to help support those who need it most in 2010 so that we don’t lose those seats? Honestly, the way Round 1 was presented, I thought it was the latter. But too many started harping on the former, which brings me to my third suggestion:

3) In future rounds, new rules: A) in the threads of posts appearing on FDL’s front page to announce anything to do with the contest, no one can write comments that oppose or attack any of the candidates (campaigning in support of a candidate is fine); B) anyone can write a diary in support or opposition to a candidate; and, C) people who oppose a view expressed in a diary supporting or opposing a candidate for the Fire Dog contest are limited to two comments that oppose the diarist’s position (more than two isn’t fair to the diarist and constitutes thread hijacking).

—–

I’d like to emphasis the importance of Suggestion 2 above. We really need to be helping the best progressive incumbents who are at the greatest risk in 2010, not use the contest to reward the best progressives or, as some tried to do during the course of this contest, debate who is the best progressive ever or attack a progressive for one or another particular position. Let’s just concede that, with the exception of Kucinich, no member of the CPC is perfect and focus on maintaining and expanding the number of progressives in the House!

My omission in not first acknowledging the extraordinary web-based political support instrument that Jane and her elves have created with this effort. A number of good suggestions here on honing the process for subsequent rounds, toward the aim of Mo Better.

Consider in the next round before you vote who voted NO on the Iran Sanctions Act
Kucinich (OH),(oops he all ready won) John Conyers (MI), Fortney Stark (CA), Stephen Lynch (MA), Maurice Hinchey (NY), Earl Blumenauer (Or), James McDermott (Wa), Tammy Baldwin (WI), Gwen Moore (WI)

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=h2009-975

You may notice that both Grayson and Weiner are absent from this list.

—————————————————————————–
The votes on condemning the Goldstone Report
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2009/roll838.xml

Hinchey, Stark, Blumenauer ,Lynch voted NO on the Iran Sanctions ACt and NO to the condemnation of the Goldstone Report

Sorry folks I had said on another thread that Grijalva had voted no on the Iran Sanctions Act. He voted Aye

Here is a little about which Reps did not support Israel’s attack on the Gaza
http://www.jewishvoiceforpeace.org/publish/article_1241.shtml

Had no idea that Pelosi lead the way
“An even stronger House resolution, sponsored by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., passed the House by a lopsided 390-5 roll call vote (with 22 members voting “present”). Both resolutions placed the blame for the death and destruction exclusively on the Palestinian side and are being widely interpreted as a rebuke to the international human rights community and the United Nations, which have cited both Hamas and the Israeli government for war crimes.”

Democrat Controlled Congress Supports Israeli war crimes
http://revisionistreview.blogspot.com/2009/01/democrat-controlled-congress-supports.html

I hope the progressive community here at FDL and beyond will consider our Reps votes on these very serious issues in the next round

Great contest and Congrats to the best congressman in a generation: Dennis K! If I may throw my 2 cents in…I think most of us here are in the same boat, so enjoy the ride and be kind. Cheers.

i am pleased that dennis won. he really cares about issues that affect people. a compassionate man.

Grayson & Weiner don’t really meet the 3 specified criteria. But their win is the fault of the uninformed voters. Most probably did not even look at the criteria check chart.
1) Pledged to vote against any war funding that does not have troop withdrawal provisions
2) Voted against June 2009 war supplemental
3) Pledged to vote against any health care bill that does not have a public option.
Whereas Kucinich had checks in all 3,really needs the money, & his win is much deserved.

I do think this online campaign is a terrific grassroots idea. Knoxville makes some good points on the process. I got in really late on the poll & don’t know much about it.

Thank you very much Leen for your links & interesting info.

Round 2 has some great possibilities.

me too gingyjaye :)

I’m really sad to see Chuck Schumer Jr. on the list too. Oh, well, at least Kucinich is number one…

Thanks for compiling that info, Leen. Those votes should carry a lot of weight for that handful of reps, because they indicate a capacity for courage that undoubtedly extends to issues beyond those where AIPAC holds sway.

Beyond that, sadly, the replacing Blue Dogs, “centrists,” sunny-day liberals, and faux progressives with PEPs would be a huge and valuable initial accomplishment. I also think that most PEPs inwardly understand I/P better than they let on publicly, but it’s going to take activism, especially Jewish activism, on a large scale to convince them to speak and act in accord with that understanding.

I did what I could linking to their votes in condemning the Goldstone Report and Iran Sanctions votes. (several warnings from the big cheeses moderating here) Trying to abide by their rules.

Had no idea that Pelosi led the way in sponsoring the resolution that gave a green light to Israel’s pounding of Gaza. Pelosi leading the way in the House and Reid leading the way in the Senate.

Really pissed to realize that Senator Sherrod Brown (who I have put hundreds of hours out for) voted for this resolution. Extremely disappoining

“The Senate resolution, primarily written and sponsored by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., passed the Senate by unanimous consent on a voice vote. Among the 33 co-sponsors were such otherwise liberal Democratic senators as Barbara Boxer, Calif,; Richard Durbin, Ill,; Carl Levin, Mich.; Sherrod Brown, Ohio; Barbara Mikulski, Md.; and 2004 presidential nominee John Kerry, Mass.

An even stronger House resolution, sponsored by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., passed the House by a lopsided 390-5 roll call vote (with 22 members voting “present”). Both resolutions placed the blame for the death and destruction exclusively on the Palestinian side and are being widely interpreted as a rebuke to the international human rights community and the United Nations, which have cited both Hamas and the Israeli government for war crimes.”

So called Progressives need to start pulling this one together. Either they demand that our Reps start reflecting our values across the board and stop the support for the unnecessary warmongering or we give our support to those who do reflect those values.

We need to really look at all critical issues. And what we continue to support and inflame in the middle east is a critical issue

Barney’s support for some warmongering needs to be looked at. Although he did vote against the Iraq war resolution in 2002

Iraq war resolution votes
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2002/roll455.xml

http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2009/08/16/sorry-cant-pass-health-care-bill-without-a-public-option/
Sorry, Can’t Pass Health Care Bill Without A Public Option

So far Blumenhauer, Stark, Hinchey getting my votes in the next round. Going to keep looking at the votes of others

Wow! You are an encyclopedia of info. Thank you! Been checking out your links & plan to make a spreadsheet of votes on these critical issues to keep track of who is consistently progressive in their votes, & not succumbing to insurance, big pharma, AIPAC lobbyists, corporations,war profiteering etc. Do you have vote link for the resolution that gave a green light to Israel’s pounding of Gaza? Also, going to link to 53 (Clarke backed out) who signed Ellison/McDermott letter to Obama.
http://www.fcnl.org/issues/item.php?item_id=3800&issue_id=36
Any suggestions are welcome!

Frankly, this sucks. By putting the choice up to a vote of people who mostly don’t know electoral realities, FDL Action has ended up giving its money to a few safe seats.

I’ve been most impressed by the courageous new Rep. Tom Periello who has stood up for a public healthcare option, and ending the wars, despite his district’s conservative leanings. His re-election prospects are shaky especially given the corporate money that will smear him all over TV right up until Election Day.

Rep. Marcy Kaptur, whose shown a brilliant grasp of economic issues, has a 100% rating from middleclass.org and is the prime mover for re-regulation of the banks, is also left swinging.

I won’t be donating through FDL. I can pick my own heroes.

Looking forward to your Seminal Diary with all of that information!

Masterful campaign, Jane! I hold it up to the light and it fair glitters with great design. Looking forward to Round 2 with much excitement.

Wonderful a spread sheet for more than just three issues. We need to look at our Reps across the board not just national issues.

Have not been able to find the resolution that Pelosi led in the house and Reid led in the Senate to support Israel’s pounding of Gaza
http://english.aljazeera.net/news/americas/2009/01/20091920212870205.html

US congress votes to back Israel
Israel and the US have a long history of close
ties [GALLO/GETTY]

The US House of Representatives has voted to endorse a resolution backing Israel in its offensive in Gaza, in which at least 780 Palestinians have been killed.

The body passed Friday’s resolution “recognising Israel’s right to defend itself against attacks from Gaza” by 390 votes to five.

The measure also noted that the humanitarian situation in Gaza “is becoming more acute” but did not rebuke Israel.

Keith Ellison, the only Muslim member of US congress, was among the 22 members of the House who voted “present”, which means that they voted neither in favour or against the resolution.