WHITE HOUSE FIRES CNN, NY TIMES, LA TIMES & POLITICO VIA BRIEFING EXCLUSION

WHITE HOUSE FIRES CNN, NY TIMES, LA TIMES & POLITICO VIA BRIEFING EXCLUSION:

MAINSTREAM MEDIA LIBERAL BIAS vs TRUMP.

TRUMP WILL ALWAYS PREVAIL BECAUSE HE'S A FEARLESS NY MEDIA GENIUS.


Sources: CNN, Alex Jones, Washington Post, NY Times


****** White House blocks CNN, New York Times from press briefing hours after Trump slams media


The White House on Friday barred news outlets — including CNN, the New York Times, Politico and the Los Angeles Times — from attending an off-camera press briefing held by spokesman Sean Spicer, igniting another controversy concerning the relationship between the Trump administration and the media.

The Wall Street Journal, which did participate in the briefing, said in a statement that it was unaware of the exclusions and "had we known at the time, we would not have participated, and we will not participate in such closed briefings in the future."

The Washington Post did not have a reporter present at the time of the gaggle.

CNN's Sara Murray went on air to describe what happened:

We lined up.

We were told there was a list ahead of time, which is sort of abnormal, but we put our name on a list. And then when we went to enter, I was blocked by a White House staffer, who said we were not on the list for this gaggle today.

Now, normally, if you were going to do something like this — an extended gaggle, off camera — you would have one person from each news outlet.

As you know, we have multiple people from CNN here every day. So, if you're going to do something beyond a pool, which is sort of the smallest group of reporters that then disseminates the information, you would have one person from every news outlet.

That is not what the White House was doing today. What the White House was doing was handpicking the outlets they wanted in for this briefing.

So Breitbart, the Washington Times, the One America News Network — news outlets that maybe the White House feels are more favorable were all allowed in, whereas I was blocked from entering, Politico was blocked from entering, the New York Times, the L.A. Times. All of these news outlets were blocked from going to a gaggle.

White House Correspondents' Association President Jeff Mason called in to CNN to say the organization is “still getting information about” the decision, adding:

They clearly wanted to have a gaggle that was not on camera and was not the full press corps today. We don't object to there being briefings like that that aren't always on camera, but we have encouraged them when they want to do something like that ... [to] still do it in the press room and do it in a place where all the reporters have a chance to ask questions.

So, we've made that clear, and we're going to continue to have discussions with them about that. And we're not happy about how this happened today.
The Post's Executive Editor Marty Baron issued the following statement:

“It’s appalling that the White House would exclude news outlets like the New York Times, CNN, Politico, the Los Angeles Times, and BuzzFeed from its publicly announced briefings. This is an undemocratic path that the administration is traveling. There is nothing to be gained from the White House restricting the public’s access to information.

We are currently evaluating what our response will be if this sort of thing happens again.”
White House deputy communications director Raj Shah insisted this was all much ado about nothing.

But New York Times Executive Editor Dean Baquet declared that “nothing like this has ever happened at the White House in our long history of covering multiple administrations of different parties.”

BuzzFeed editor in chief Ben Smith, whose outlet also was excluded, added this: "While we strongly object to the White House's apparent attempt to punish news outlets whose coverage it does not like, we won't let these latest antics distract us from continuing to cover this administration fairly and aggressively."

Ben Wizner, director of the Speech, Privacy and Technology Project at the American Civil Liberties Union called the White House's move "yet another disturbing example of the Trump administration’s contempt for the vital role a free press plays in our democracy."

White House press secretary Sean Spicer himself had previously criticized the idea of limiting media access to the White House.

Two months ago, in a panel discussion, he said open access for the media is “what makes a democracy a democracy versus a dictatorship.”

recent days, the president has grown increasingly critical of what he calls the "fake news media. Hours before the limited-access gaggle, Trump devoted much of an address at the Conservative Political Action Conference to bashing the media.

“A few days ago, I called the fake news media the enemy of the people, and they are,” the president said. “They are the enemy of the people.”

Fox News anchor Bret Baier quickly discouraged gloating on the right, noting that his network's rivals showed solidarity when the Obama White House tried to freeze out Fox News eight years ago.

In 2009, the Obama administration attempted to exclude Fox News from a round of TV interviews with “pay czar” Kenneth Feinberg. Jake Tapper (then of ABC, now of CNN) stood up for one of his network's “sister organizations” during a press briefing.

“Can you explain why it's appropriate for the White House to decide that a news organization is not one?” Tapper asked Robert Gibbs, the White House press secretary at the time.

Rival networks refused to conduct interviews with Feinberg unless Fox News was granted one, too.

Fox Business Network told The Post that one of its reporters, Blake Burman, also was blocked from participating in the gaggle.

Fox News chief White House correspondent John Roberts said on air that his network will join others in protesting the exclusion of certain outlets.

Joe Williams Blackballed By GOP For Negative Remarks About Romney; Politico's Biased, Double-Standard Journalism Policies

Would Politico Have Fired Joe Williams (a BLACK Reporter) for making Negative Remarks about Barack Obama?

NO!!!

If Joe Williams were WHITE and made Negative Comments about Mitt Romney would Politico have Fired him?

NO!!!!

I have witnessed WHITE Politico Reporters on Cable News speaking openly against Mitt Romney, yet I haven't heard where any of those WHITE Reporters were Suspended or Terminated.

Firing a BLACK Journalist for making Negative remarks about a WHITE Presidential Candidate, while refusing to Fire WHITE Journalists for making Negative Remarks about BLACK & WHITE Presidential Candidates?

What example of Journalism Integrity is that Politico???

This further proves Mitt Romney does have an Adversion to People of Color, especially BLACK people and that Media Organizations like Politico often lean more to the Right than they care to admit.

Hence Politico's Biased, Double-Standard Journalism Policies.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Joe Williams: how I became a victim of the ‘right wing noise machine’

As soon as the words escaped my lips, live on national television, I suspected I might have a problem.

I’d used the phrase trying to explain why Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney spent so much time chatting with Fox News, why he’s kept the mainstream press at bay, and why he seemed so awkward and stiff around Minorities.

It didn’t take long for my suspicions to be confirmed.

Within hours, my Blackberry was filled with racist hate mail, my Twitter account had been ravaged, I was on indefinite suspension, and my 28-year career was in jeopardy.

The Right Wing Noise Machine — a small cabal of self-appointed watchdogs on a perpetual hunt for perceived liberal bias — had struck again.

By now, my cautionary tale is familiar: after saying Romney, a Millionaire Businessman, is more comfortable with around people like him was like waving a red cape waving in front of a charging bull — namely, Big Media, an arm of the late Andrew Breitbart’s online empire, and DC Caller, a web site scandal sheet run by Tucker Carlson.

After rummaging through some 3,000 tweets, they cherry-picked ones designed to prove their flimsy case: that I was biased against Romney, a Racist against Whites and a representative of my employer’s slant against Conservatives.

At this point, I have to own my role in the story: I was careless on Twitter, ignored some warning signs, and realized too late that my followers weren’t the only ones watching me.

Life on the business end of a scandal, is mortifying; an old friend told me I’d raced past the blues singer and the rock guitarist to become the lead result in a Joe Williams Google search, for all the wrong reasons.

Yet it’s easy to miss the larger lesson in my cautionary tale — that a tiny group of organizations with internet access, a money pipeline and next to no credibility can coerce powerful, independent news organizations that pride themselves on speaking truth to power.

Rather than inform the public or operate as a legitimate check on the media, pointing out gaps in newsroom diversity or errors in coverage, members of the RWNM only care about their agenda: harassing, undermining, discrediting and embarrassing people who don’t agree with their view of the world.

Breitbart.com, the group that targeted me, is the same outfit behind the case of Shirley Sherrod, the Agriculture Department official who was fired after a video surfaced of her making racially inflammatory remarks — a video that was later shown to be heavily edited and taken out of context.

Another RWNM member: James O’Keefe, the conservative agent provocateur whose ham-fisted, out-of-context “stings” helped take down ACORN, an organization dedicated to registering minority voters, led to the firing of an NPR executive for making disparaging remarks about the Tea Party – and landed him in jail for tampering with the phones in the office of Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.) while trying to engineer another elaborate, phony set-up.

And Daily Caller, the group that posted embarrassing tweets of mine that had nothing to do with anti-Romney bias, employs Neil Munro, the reporter who harassed President Barack Obama by yelling out irrelevant questions during a White House press conference a few days ago.

Given that dismal track record — and the big “reveal” trumpeted by Breitbart himself, a decades-old video that showed Obama, as a law student, once said some nice things about Harvard Law professor Derrick Bell — it’s surprising that any allegations these groups make are taken seriously, and that major news organizations with solid credentials don’t tell these guys to take a long hike off a short pier.

Yet the specious claims and hollow arguments of the RWNM’s promoters somehow are still heard and accepted by those who have the power to change the dynamic.

Too often, however, they don’t, with results akin to a kid forking over his lunch money whenever the schoolyard bully decides to shake his fist.

Just ask Chris Hayes, host of MSNBC’s Up with Chris Hayes.

For simply questioning whether the word “hero” is overused to desensitize the American public to perpetual war, he got a face full of shrapnel from “outraged” RWNM conservatives who publicly questioned everything from his patriotism to his manhood.

Hayes issued an apology days later, but the Right Wing Message Machine’s phony outrage had done its work, adding more ice to the chilling effect it’s layered on American journalism and critical thought.

Reporters and news organizations have always prided itself on being fearless, independent and intrepid, willing to push back on government and stand up for free speech. Now, in a hyper-kinetic, hyper-partisan age, it seems we’re not even willing to push back on our own critics, which doesn’t bode all that well for my colleagues.

I’d bet my last dollar that I’m not the only journalist in Washington who’s written, said, tweeted or done something that Breitbart.com and company would see as biased. To paraphrase an old adage, they see themselves as hammers, and journalists are the nails.

To my great regret, I wasn’t the first person to stumble into their cross-hairs, and I’m certain I won’t be the last.

Unless journalists and their employers decide to stand up to the bullies, only one question remains: who’s next?





Joe Williams to leave POLITICO

Joe Williams, the POLITICO reporter who was suspended last week for controversial remarks he had made on television and Twitter, will leave his job.

"After some cordial discussions, Joe Williams and I mutually decided that the best step for him is to begin a transition to the next phase of his career," POLITICO Editor-in-Chief John Harris wrote in a memo to staff, sent early Saturday morning. "Joe is an experienced and respected journalist, with keen insights into politics. After nearly 30 years in the business, he has the authority and is ready to give voice to his insights and conclusions in a new setting."

"He’ll be on leave of absence during this transition, and he’s got my gratitude for the contributions he made here, both as reporter and editor. I have told Joe — and it’s a sentiment others who worked closely with him here share — that he’ll have my support as he prepares for what I expect will be a good and prominent next chapter in his career," Harris wrote.

In an MSNBC interview on June 21, Williams suggested that Mitt Romney was only comfortable around white people, prompting the conservative website Breitbart.com to flag a number of negative remarks Williams had made about Romney on Twitter. That night, Harris and Executive Editor Jim VandeHei sent a memo to staff announcing that Williams's remarks "fell short of our standards for fairness and judgment," and that he would be suspended pending review.

In response to this morning's news, Williams wrote: "While I'm disappointed at the circumstances of my departure, I'm grateful to John Harris for giving me an opportunity to work with him at Politico."



Ex-Politico White House correspondent Joe Williams pleaded guilty to assaulting ex-wife

It has been revealed that disgraced political commentator Joe Williams pleaded guilty and was convicted of assaulting his ex-wife, author Amy Alexander on May 24 of this year.

The former Politico White House correspondent who lost his job last month for a racial comment aimed at Mitt Romney received a $200 fine and six months probation.

The probation ends on November 24 this year and comes on top of a year long court order against the controversial reporter that compels him to stay away from his two children's school and to surrender all his firearms.

Williams and his wife divorced on April 7 2008 after approximately 12 years of marriage.

Previous to the court granting the divorce, Alexander had filed for restraining order against Williams on August 2, 2007, that was dismissed after Alexander withdrew the complaint.

Williams refused to comment on the allegations of domestic violence but his ex-wife did make a statement:

'I can't comment on a legal case but will say that I sincerely hope that Joe Williams finds his professional footing and that he also begins to take seriously his responsibilities as the father of our two children.'

The Politico reporter lost his job last month when he said that Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney was more comfortable around white.

Williams made the controversial comments just over a week ago on MSNBC and was let go by the political website in an announcement made on Saturday morning by the editor, John Harris.

'After some cordial discussions, Joe Williams and I mutually decided that the best step for him is to begin a transition to the next phase of his career,' wrote Harris.

Already suspended from his job for saying that the former Massachusetts governor was 'very comfortable' around 'white folks', Williams had tried to claim that he was the victim of a right-wing smear campaign.

However, as commentators and conservative websites trawled through Williams' Twitter account postings, they discovered other pointed examples of his apparent biased towards Romney.

Upon his initial suspension by Politico, the website claimed that his comments on MSNBC 'fell short of our standards for fairness and judgement'.

Referring to his tweets, he was also cited for 'an unacceptable number' of statements and for not being able to 'cover politics fairly and free of partisan bias.'

'Joe is an experienced and respected journalist, with keen insights into politics,' said the statement from John Harris.

'After nearly 30 years in the business, he has the authority and is ready to give voice to his insights and conclusions in a new setting.'

Williams himself was reported by Politico to have responded, 'While I'm disappointed at the circumstances of my departure, I'm grateful to John Harris for giving me an opportunity to work with him at Politico.'

Before his suspension for making racially-charged statements about Mitt Romney Joe Williams apparently had some other concerns about appropriate race relations in the political sphere.

White House reporter Joe Williams, who worked for Politico since April 2011, tweeted on March 30 of 2012, 'what's most irritating is the overlay of blatant racism. that's the secret sauce in the Politico s***burger'.

The controversy began while speaking as a contributor during Martin Bashir's MSNBC show, Williams, who is African-American said that Romney is more at ease when he makes his frequent appearances on Fox News Channel and implied that race is a consideration.

Saying that Romney 'is very, very comfortable' during his appearances on 'Fox and Friends', Mr Williams went on to comment, 'They're white folks who are very much relaxed in their own company.'

With a history of describing Romney and other Republicans in a controversial manner on his Twitter account, Williams was suspended after a meeting with Politico's founding editors John Harris and Jim VandeHei.

Shortly after the suspension was announced, his Twitter feed became private.

The Daily Caller was able to still view the account somehow, and asked Williams about the 'special sauce' Tweet.

He responded that on March 30 'I was having a bad day,' and then directed any further questions to his attorney.

'Regrettably, an unacceptable number of Joe Williams's public statements on cable and Twitter have called into question his commitment to this responsibility,' the Politico editors said at the time of his suspension.

They have not publicly commented about his allegations of racism at the political news outlet.

'(The MSNBC) appearance came in the context of other remarks on Twitter that, cumulatively, require us to make clear that our standards are serious, and so are the consequences for disregarding them.

'This is true for all POLITICO journalists, including an experienced and well-respected voice like Joe Williams.

'Following discussion of this matter with editors, Joe has been suspended while we review the matter.'

Making frequent references to racial factors during his MSNBC appearances, Mr. Williams stepped over the line it seems with his opinions last week.

'And (Romney's appearances on Fox & Friends are) unscripted. It’s the only time they let Mitt off the leash. But it also points out a larger problem he’s got to solve if he wants to be successful come this fall.

'Romney is very, very comfortable, it seems, with people who are like him.
'That’s one of the reasons why he seems so stiff and awkward in town hall settings, why he can’t relate to people other than that.

'But when he comes on ‘Fox & Friends,’ they’re like him.

'They’re white folks who are very much relaxed in their own company.'

The suspension of Williams follows his continued ridicule of Romney on his Twitter feed.

He has made tweets that allude to Romney being served his food by a butler: 'Jeeves knows my tastes' he wrote when Romney said he has never eaten anything surprising.


View Larger Map


Sources: Daily Mail, MSNBC, NY Mag, Politico, Russia Today, The Grio, The Root, The Young Turks, Twitter, Youtube, Google Maps

Valerie Jarrett vs Angry Business Leaders; Tax Cuts Not Games!

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Business: Barack Obama's Corporate Outreach Not Enough


After Business Leaders sank Millions into the Midterms to defeat Democrats, a chastened Obama administration is seeking reconciliation with the Corporate community.

But after two years of building frustration, the executives say they won’t be won over by another round of private lunches and photo opportunities at the White House.

If President Barack Obama has any hope for a truce with corporate America in time for his 2012 reelection campaign, he needs to drop the name-calling, try to see their point of view better and step up with some specific proposals.


(See: Poll: Non-voters split over Obama)


“No amount of relationship-building is a substitute for policy,” said Johanna Schneider, executive director for external affairs at the Business Roundtable, which was once one of the administration’s most enduring corporate allies.

“We have to see some concrete policies that will help grow business because everyone’s goal is to grow jobs. This isn’t hocus-pocus. There are concrete steps to take for job growth,” she added.

The White House is embarking on a new round of corporate outreach, said Valerie Jarrett, a key White House adviser, who told POLITICO in an interview that she is lining up a fresh round of private, luncheon sessions and that other events could be in the works.

The White House is also mulling over an Obama appearance at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce — even though the group spent about $75 million attacking Democrats and assisting the Republican takeover of the House. (See: Obama plans truce with Chamber)

“Our position moving forward is to find as many opportunities as possible to interact with the business community,” said Jarrett. “The president is very interested in the coming weeks in hearing additional input from the business community.”

The White House’s relationship with the corporate world has always had a sort of Mars-Venus quality to it. Business leaders say Obama simply doesn’t get them and has no one in the White House with corporate experience or who is steeped in the daily challenges of operating in a global economy. It didn’t help when Obama lashed out at “fat cat bankers” on Wall Street at the height of the regulatory reform effort or attacked BP, a onetime White House ally on energy reform, in the midst of the Louisiana oil spill. (See: OMB's Lew confirmed after hold lifted)

The message to other sectors: "You could be next," said one corporate lobbyist.

Some White House officials, in turn, privately express frustration that the business world seems to give Obama no credit for supporting bailouts of Wall Street and the auto industry as well as an economic stimulus bill that likely spared the country a deeper recession. Many CEOs now are enjoying hefty corporate profits and a Dow at healthy levels in part because of Obama’s efforts in steering the economy through the global meltdown, administration officials contend.

But the stakes for Obama couldn’t be higher, economically or politically, in rebuilding relations. Cooperation with the business community is vital for job growth and economic recovery. Expanding trade and cutting the deficit, two other Obama priorities, will require Republican votes — which the business community could deliver.

David Cote, the chief executive officer of Honeywell Corp. and a supporter of the White House policies, said gains can occur with a concerted effort by the administration.

“The administration is being thoughtful about getting input. You will see more outreach,” said Cote, who recently traveled with Obama to Asia to highlight trade and serves on the White House deficit commission. “I find it hard to believe people in the business community will turn a deaf ear to that. I don’t view that as being unrecoverable.”

In September, Obama called for deep investments in infrastructure projects. He also proposed expanding and permanently extending the research and development tax credit and allowing businesses to write off 100 percent of the expenses for new plants and other investments immediately — three items on the business community's wish-list for years.

Other administration officials are also reaching out.

Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner met privately with Chamber President Tom Donohue during the White House Asia trade trip and appeared before the Chamber’s board a week after the midterms — a striking departure from a White House-Chamber feud that briefly grabbed headlines last year and during those very same elections.

On Dec. 8, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano and Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius are scheduled to meet with the Business Roundtable, an association that includes the CEOs of the nation’s largest companies.

But there have been some bumps along the way.

Last week, Treasury’s Gene Sperling appeared at a retreat for technology executives. “He expressed a desire to work closely,” said one attendee. “Then, when we brought up the issue of repatriation [the opportunity for corporations to bring overseas earnings back to the U.S. at lower tax rates], he openly showed frustration with us for just bringing the subject up.”

It’s a complaint heard often from the business community. “Access isn’t the issue. The question is: Where is the delivery?” said one corporate representative who, like others, sought anonymity to speak freely.

Greg Brown, CEO of Motorola and an administration ally, said the White House had to take necessary but politically difficult steps to stabilize the economy. But he also noted, “Now that we are moving from stability to growth, I think there is an acknowledgment that the relationship needs to get closer and we collectively need to find common ground.”

To achieve that, the White House must overcome a hefty wariness in the business community about Obama’s populist bent that exploded into open warfare during the midterms when wealthy individuals and corporations spent more than $200 million trying to defeat Democrats.

“The amount of money they spent was rather stunning,” said an administration official.

One of the most striking break-ups of 2010 was between Obama and the Business Roundtable.

From the start of his administration, Obama framed the coalition of CEOs as the grown-up alternative to the Chamber. In turn, the Roundtable CEOs made a conscious decision to try to work with the White House.

But as final negotiations over health care heated up earlier this year and several of their concerns were left unresolved, frustrated voices dominated the monthly CEO meetings. They grew even louder when the White House turned to Wall Street regulatory reform.

Still, the CEOs voted in February, March, April and May to stay at the table. In June, they gave up.

Why? The infamous consumer watchdog office? The new health care mandates? No, say insiders familiar with internal discussions, the roundtable walked away because of a group of technical fixes to the health care and Wall Street reform laws they sought — and in some cases were assured would be done — that never got done.

For instance, one provision they wanted deleted from the Wall Street bill gives labor leaders and other minority shareholders a chance to change the way corporate boards are formed — viewed as a “poke in the eye” by the Roundtable’s CEOs.

Another removed a tax incentive for providing retiree drug coverage, which roundtable officials warned would increase Medicare costs and force companies that dropped the coverage to publicly restate their earnings because of the lost tax breaks.

When several did, the headlines that followed linking their action to the reform bill prompted a profanity-laced call from former White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel and threats of hearings on Capitol Hill.
And a third curbed corporate trading of special purpose derivatives, a long-standing revenue-generating mechanism that wasn’t related to the highly speculative trading that led to the economic collapse.

“These weren’t issues that got the president any votes or political leverage,” said one insider to the conversations. “These were issues that demonstrated that this administration doesn’t get it. It’s like talking to your dog.”

The Roundtable’s Schneider conceded that “the tone and tenor of the dialogue wasn’t as collegial as one might have hoped.” But she said the trade group kept up a dialogue with the White House and that several Roundtable CEOs were on Obama’s recent Asia trip, which became “an important relationship-building effort.”

Other executives complain that the White House continually promised a “hard pivot” to job creation and the economy that never fully materialized, at least not in a way that made corporate America feel it could be part of the solution.

“There was no challenge to come work together for a common purpose,” one executive said. “There was never a call for weekly conference calls with the president and demands to go get stuff done. That’s the power he has as president. And instead they kept pushing people away.”

The way Jarrett sees it, the White House was dealt a bad economic hand and had no choice but to move aggressively with legislation that had sweeping and intrusive impacts on the private markets — a course Obama had not necessarily advocated when he launched his presidential bid before the economic meltdown.

As a consequence, the business community had a lot to digest about what exactly the Obama administration meant to them, which created some uncertainty about the course ahead.

Now that the administration is drafting the regulations to implement the reform laws, White House officials said, tensions should ease as business leaders see that they are coordinating to ensure there are no unintended consequences.

Jarrett also said trade, tax reform, deficit reduction and education are all areas where the business community and the White House share common ground and could join ranks for action.

Brown, of Motorola, said it will take “compromise, conviction and courage” for both parties to make the changes necessary to improve the economy and create a robust job environment.

“The fact of the matter is these are tough times, politically charged and very emotional. As a country, there is no easy formula or short cut here. This is tough stuff,” he said.

“We’re coming out of a dark tunnel, and it’s been hard. It’s been hard on everybody, the public and private sector. Now, we need to lock and go.”


View Larger Map


Sources: CNBC, MSNBC, Politico, Google Maps

St. Louis Raising $60M For 2012 DNC: Unions Reject Charlotte

St. Louis Corporate Community Prepared To Step Up For DNC Bid


The local corporate community is prepared to step up in a big way to help land the 2012 Democratic National Convention, says the leader of one of the area's largest business groups.

Many of the city's most prominent companies have not yet been vocal about their support for the bid, but they are prepared to help raise the dollar amounts -- likely between $50 and $60 million -- needed to bring the Democrat's next presidential nominating convention to St. Louis, said Mike DeCola, head of Mississippi Lime Company and chairman of the Regional Business Council.

"The corporate community has to step up in a number of ways, certainly the fundraising is a big part of that," DeCola said. "We are keenly aware of the dollars we need to put up just to get the convention here."

Individual companies have not been assigned target amounts to raise, DeCola said, though "our members are aware that's coming."

St. Louis is one of four finalists to host the party, which is expected to announce its decision in the next month or so.

DeCola's comments come as St. Louis officials believe the competition is coming down to them and Charlotte, where the effort is being led by an outspoken utility chief, Duke Energy head Jim Rogers, who has led fundraising efforts and even sought to enlist basketball great Michael Jordan, currently owner of the city's NBA franchise, to lobby the White House.

DeCola said just because "we don't have guys that like to beat their chest in the press like that" doesn't mean St. Louis' business community is not serious about helping attract the convention, which will bring thousands of visitors, and perhaps more importantly, lasting civic prestige to the winner.

"The business leaders in this community all know what's involved, and they have all expressed very, very strong support to make this happen," DeCola said. "We have companies that are much bigger, much more globally well-known than Duke Energy."

DeCola was one of several executives who met with a scout team for the Democratic National Committee at a lunch at the Jewel Box while the group made its site visit here over the summer.

The Regional Business Council is made up of medium-sized companies, so-called "mid-caps."

However, any corporate effort to land the convention would likely need participation from the local business heavyweights: companies such as Express Scripts, Monsanto, Enterprise Rent-A-Car and, of course, Anheuser-Busch.

The Brewery has already signaled a support for the bid. In a statement issued Monday, A-B president David Peacock said the city already has a "track record" of hosting major events, such as last year's baseball All-Star game.

"The people here in St. Louis are very accommodating and they put a great face on the city for events of this size," Peacock said "We are excited the DNC is considering St. Louis, and we would be proud to have them here."

Meanwhile, Charlotte's corporate community may actually be a liability for its chances -- the city is home to financial institutions such as Bank of America, which accepted $40 billion in federal bailout money.








Unions To DNC 2012: Shun These Cities: Charlotte & Cleveland


A Union representing hotel workers has asked the Democratic National Committee to rule out two of its four convention-site finalists, Cleveland and Charlotte, N.C., because they lack sufficient unionized hotel facilities.

"Among the DNC's four finalist cities, only St. Louis and Minneapolis" have the capacity to "house a large portion of the delegates and other guests ... in unionized hotels," John Wilhelm, president of the international UNITE HERE union of hotel and textile workers, wrote in a letter to DNC Chairman Tim Kaine.

"Therefore, one of those two cities should be the DNC's choice for 2012. Unfortunately, Charlotte and Cleveland do not fit the bill, and they should be removed from the list."

Though the letter was dated Oct. 6, it wasn't publicized until this week, when the union's Minneapolis local, eager to enhance its city's chances, issued a press release on the subject.

"We're just very interested in having the convention here on a number of levels, and for the international it's a priority that it be in a union city," said Wade Luneberg, secretary-treasurer and political director of UNITE HERE Local 17 in Minneapolis. "We think it's important to differentiate between the four [finalist] cities and see that Minneapolis and St. Louis rise to the top."

Charlotte, N.C., has no unionized hotels, and its convention center's employees are not union members, according to Wilhelm's letter. Cleveland has some union hotels, but only a handful in the downtown area and about 10 in the larger region; they belong to a competing union, Workers United.

UNITE HERE under Wilhelm split with former President Bruce Raynor in a bitter and protracted battle that ended last year with Raynor leaving and founding Workers United.

Workers United, which has affiliated with the Service Employees International Union, says it has 150,000 members, while UNITE HERE, an affiliate of the AFL-CIO, claims 265,000.

A subcommittee of the DNC visited potential convention sites over the summer to evaluate their logistical suitability and advise the committee on their findings. A decision is expected in late 2010 or early 2011.

Democratic sources familiar with the decision-making process say Charlotte and St. Louis are the current front-runners, with Charlotte at a slight disadvantage because of its small overall hotel room stock.

Political considerations — including last week's election results — are expected to play a major role in the decision-making process. The defeat of a Democratic governor in Ohio may have hurt Cleveland's chances, while Minneapolis could be helped if Minnesota's Democratic gubernatorial nominee, Mark Dayton, hangs on to win. He currently leads in the count in a race that is likely to go to a recount.

The Minneapolis area has at least 20 union hotels totaling 5,300 rooms, with more than 2,000 workers, Wilhelm's letter notes. St. Louis, the letter says, has 10 union hotels with more than 3,000 rooms. Both cities' sports arenas and convention centers are unionized as well.

"Employees at union hotels are far more likely than employees in non-union hotels to get the sort of basic fair treatment for which the Democratic Party stands — good wages, affordable health benefits, stable long-term positions, and respect and a voice on the job," Wilhelm wrote. "For these reasons, those employees are more likely to provide delegates and guests with better service as well."

UNITE HERE official Pilar Weiss said the DNC was receptive to the union's concerns. "It's early on," she said. "We're having a dialogue with them."

A spokesman for the DNC, Hari Sevugan, said, "As always, we are looking at a number of factors and will have an announcement in the coming months."






Charlotte, St. Louis Are Convention Finalists


A St. Louis television station is reporting that Charlotte and St. Louis have emerged as finalists in the competition to serve as host of the 2012 Democratic National Convention.

KTVI said Tuesday that the two cities have taken the lead over the other cities under consideration, Cleveland and Minneapolis.

Democratic Party officials have said they expect to make a choice later this year.

Both the St. Louis station and Politico.com said the issue of unionized hotels could tilt the competition against Charlotte. Most of the major hotels in St. Louis are unionized, while Charlotte's are not.

Labor unions have been a longtime bulwark of the Democratic Party.

Politico also noted that Charlotte has fewer hotel rooms than St. Louis.

Supporters of Charlotte's effort to win the convention have noted that Democrats held their 2008 national convention in Denver, where nearly all the hotels are not unionized.

The issue of unionized hotels has surfaced several times in recent weeks. Last month, a group composed of unionized hotel workers sent a letter to Democratic Party officials, asking that Charlotte and Cleveland be removed from consideration for the convention, because of a lack of unionized hotels.

Politico said Cleveland's AFL-CIO office sent a letter this week to Democratic Party Chairman Tom Kaine, saying the city has six union hotels downtown and a seventh near Hopkins International Airport.








Survey Reveals Charlotte's Crime Problem Is Not Improving


Respondents to a survey organized by a Charlotte community organization disagree with Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police statistics showing a dropping crime rate in the city.

About 80 percent of the approximately 500 people who participated in the survey said the crime problem in Charlotte is either unchanged or has gotten worse over the past two years.

The study was conducted in recent weeks by Neighbors For A Safer Charlotte, a grassroots organization founded in April 2008.

Their study results contrast with a steady stream of monthly crime statistics from Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police, showing -- for the most part -- that the crime rate has been dropping over the past 12 to 18 months. Earlier this week, CMPD statistics through March showed the overall crime rate is down 15 percent since the same time a year ago.

The survey results show that if CMPD statistics are correct, the perception among residents is that crime remains a big problem.

Respondents did not fall into the "lock-them-up-and-throw-away-the-key" category, as most of them said they support more mental health and substance abuse programs -- and said they believe only violent offenders should be put in jail.

Here are results from some of the organization's questions:

How much of a problem do you feel crime is in the Charlotte area?

75% rated it "serious" or "very serious"

In the past two years, has crime in Charlotte increased, stayed the same, or decreased?

42% said it is worse. Another 38% said it has remained the same.

Do you own a gun for protection?

31% said they owned a gun. Another 18 percent said they are considering buying one.

Which factors tend to increase the crime problem locally?

91% said gang and drug activity.

83% said the absence of a responsible parent or role model tends to increase crime activity among juveniles.

75% said lenient sentencing equals more crime.

50% said racial tensions were not likely to contribute to crime.

Not rated as significant factors were unemployment and poverty, and the lack of a police presence.

Have the City of Charlotte and Mecklenburg County done enough to deal with the crime problem?

79% said more needs to be done.

Are the courts too lenient or too tough?

78% said they are too lenient.

Do you plan to vote in the District Attorney race in November?

91% said they plan to vote in that contest.

What would help solve the crime problem?

96% said tougher sentencing.

88% said more programs for juveniles outside regular school hours.

85% said more mental health and substance abuse programs.

70% said only violent offenders should be incarcerated.








Forbes.com Ranks Charlotte, N.C. 14th Most Dangerous City


(Charlotte-Gastonia-Concord, N.C.-S.C. metropolitan statistical area)

Population: 1,635,133

Violent Crimes per 100,000: 721

To determine our list, we used violent crime statistics from the FBI's latest uniform crime report, issued in 2008.

The violent crime category is composed of four offenses: murder and non-negligent manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery and aggravated assault.

We evaluated U.S. Metropolitan statistical areas--geographic entities defined by the U.S. Office of Management and Budget for use by Federal agencies in collecting, tabulating and publishing federal statistics--with more than 500,000 residents.


View Larger Map



Sources: CNN, CQ Press, DemComWatch, Forbes.com, McClatchy Newspapers, MSNBC, Neighbors For A Safer Charlotte, Politico, St. Louis Today, WCNC, Youtube, Google Maps

Bill Nelson, Other Dems Turn On Pres. Obama: Angry Rants!

Senate Democrats Vent Anger With Barack Obama


Senate Democrats — including typically mild-mannered Bill Nelson of Florida — lit into President Barack Obama during an unusually tense air-clearing caucus session on Thursday, senators and staffers told POLITICO.

Nelson told colleagues Obama’s unpopularity has become a serious liability for Democrats in his state and blamed the president for creating a toxic political environment for Democrats nationwide, according to two Democrats familiar with his remarks.

“It was a raucous caucus,” said one Democratic senator, who spoke on condition of anonymity because closed-door sessions are not supposed to be discussed with outsiders.

Nelson declined to respond when asked about the incident Thursday night, saying he was in a hurry to leave the Capitol to catch a flight. His spokesman didn’t return a request for comment.

In interviews after the marathon three-hour meeting, several senators and senior aides told POLITICO that Nelson was just one of several senators to express anger at White House missteps — and air deep concerns about their own political fates if Obama and the Democratic Party leadership can’t turn things around by 2012.

Added one veteran senator: “It was the most frank exchange of views I’ve ever seen.”

Several senators expressed the opinion that Obama needed to show more passion, while party liberals renewed their complaint that Obama should abandon the pretense of bipartisanship in the face of Minority Leader Mitch McConnell’s intransigence and what they consider the Kentucky Republican’s blatantly political tactics aimed at making Obama a one-term president.

Others said Democratic leaders need to clearly spell out what they believe are the motivations behind the Republicans' positions: that they are beholden to special interests, who bankroll their campaigns.

If Democrats keep losing the message war, they worry, they will be wiped out in 2012.

“There was a lot of passion in that room,” one senator said. “The reason is because the public is with us on our policies, but they’re not getting the message.”

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), who along with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other Democratic leaders had met with Obama at the White House earlier in the day, calmly presided over the gripe session, sources say, allowing members to have their say.

Reid, who barely survived a challenge from tea party favorite Sharron Angle, has already taken steps to improve his own messaging operation, tapping New York Sen. Chuck Schumer to run the communications and policy operations of the Democratic Caucus in the next Congress.

With 21 Democrats and two independents facing reelection in 2012, Reid and the White House will be forced to deal with skittish Democrats eager to see a sharpened political operation.

But the complaints are not new. Over the past year, Senate Democrats have expressed dissatisfaction with Obama’s policy priorities, especially his determination to ram through a health care bill against the objections of party conservatives like Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.). The caucus’s left wing, including Vermont independent Bernie Sanders, have argued the opposite point: that Obama’s timidity has led to the defection of liberals and young people turned off by Obama compromises on the public option and economic stimulus.

Thursday’s confrontation reminded some of a February 2010 showdown between Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) and Obama’s senior adviser David Axelrod after the president’s question-and-answer session with senators. An irate Franken, witnesses told POLITICO at the time, dressed down Axelrod and the White House for failing to provide a clearer sense of direction on health reform and other large legislative initiatives.


Sources: Politico

Joe Scarborough Suspended Over Campaign Donations Too

Joe Scarborough Suspended From MSNBC For Campaign Donations


MSNBC said Friday that it is suspending “Morning Joe” co-host Joe Scarborough for two days after he acknowledged giving eight previously unknown $500 contributions to friends and family members running for state and local offices during his tenure at the network, a violation of parent NBC’s ban on political contributions by employees without specific permission from the network president.

“I recognize that I have a responsibility to honor the guidelines and conditions of my employment, and I regret that I failed to do so in this matter,” Scarborough said in a statement. “I apologize to MSNBC and to anyone who has been negatively affected by my actions,” he said, adding that after he was made aware of some of the contributions, he called MSNBC President Phil Griffin “and agreed with Phil's immediate demand of a two-day suspension without pay.”

POLITICO had sought comment from the network after finding evidence that Scarborough gave at least five previously unknown $500 contributions while serving as an MNBC host — all to Republican candidates to whom he was close who were running for state legislative seats in or near Scarborough’s hometown of Pensacola, Fla. After being contacted by POLITICO about the donations, Scarborough voluntarily disclosed three other $500 contributions to a friend running for county office in Florida.

Scarborough’s suspension, during which he will not be paid, will end Wednesday, Griffin said in a statement, adding, “As Joe recognizes, it is critical that we enforce our standards and policies.”

The disciplinary action against Scarborough, a former Republican congressman who also writes a weekly column for POLITICO, came two weeks after MSNBC announced it was suspending “Countdown” host Keith Olbermann “indefinitely” for three contributions he made to Democratic candidates during the 2010 campaign cycle. The network later reduced the suspension to two days.



After the Olbermann suspension, POLITICO found two other contributions in Scarborough’s name, though the network said he had permission for one and accepted his explanation that the other was actually given by his wife.

Still, Griffin said in his statement that, the Olbermann situation prompted a conversation with Scarborough about political giving, in which the host “did not recall” the Florida contributions.

Olbermann’s suspension provoked outrage from many supporters of the former sportscaster, whose liberal opinions have helped define MSNBC as a counterpoint to Fox News with its conservative show hosts such as Glenn Beck and Bill O’Reilly. Other critics said it was pointless to enforce the standards of objective news organizations with hosts whose entire appeal is based largely on their ideological viewpoints and their personalities.

The eight newly unearthed contributions from Scarborough, who left Congress in 2001, were all made since he joined MSNBC fulltime as host of the evening show "Scarborough Country” in 2003.

They include a pair of checks to Scarborough’s brother, George Scarborough, an attorney who twice ran for state legislature, as well as three to a father-son legislative duo who have known Joe Scarborough since the mid-1990s, and three to Scarborough’s former congressional chief of staff David Stafford, who is Escambia County’s elected supervisor of elections.

The five state legislative donations – each of which was for the state’s legal maximum of $500 per election – turned up in a search of the Florida Division of Election’s campaign finance database. Some were recorded in variations of Scarborough’s full name, Charles Joseph Scarborough. In each case, his wife, Susan Scarborough gave matching contributions on the same day.

Joe and Susan Scarborough each contributed $1,000 ($500 last year and another $500 this year) tostate legislative candidate Matt Gaetz, who won an April special election for a suburban Pensacola seat. And the Scarboroughs also each gave $500 in 2005 to the state senate campaign of Gaetz’s father, Don Gaetz.

“These contributions were nothing more than simple acts of friendship,” Scarborough said in his statement Friday. “I gained nothing personally, politically, or professionally from these donations.”

But a close friend of Scarborough’s was more dismissive about the donations. “These are bulls-- local races that mean nothing to Joe,” the friend said. “Anybody who knows Joe’s life wouldn’t be surprised by the fact that these small, local donations were not top-of-mind.”

Pointing out that Scarborough on Friday was in NBC’s Washington bureau to conduct an interview with Vice President Joe Biden, the friend said “Nobody is more pissed by this distraction than Joe. He goes from interviewing the vice president of the United States to being asked about local races in Escambia and Okaloosa County, years ago. Give me a break.”

Like Scarborough’s previously disclosed contributions to Kitts and Merrill, the newly unearthed Florida contributions do seem to reflect support for longtime friends – and, in the case of his brother, close relatives.

The Gaetz’s relationship with Joe Scarborough dates back to his first congressional campaign in 1994, when Don Gaetz was running for school board and, due to a scheduling conflict, could not attend a cattle call-style debate featuring candidates for a range of offices, including Scarborough.

Gaetz asked his son Matt, then a precocious 12-year-old, to take his place.

Scarborough, then in his early 30s, joked that “he wanted to bring me to all the debates because nobody would say that he was too young to run for Congress,” recalled Matt Gaetz, who said he was so impressed by Scarborough, that he wanted to help his campaign.

“I reached in my pocket and I think I had about $12 on me, and I made a contribution to his first campaign for Congress in 1994 when nobody thought he could win,” Gaetz said. “So, when I decided to run for state representative, I called him up and asked if he would return the favor – if he would contribute to my campaign.”

Matt Gaetz also reported receiving $500 from Scarborough’s son Charles in 2009, when the latter was a college student in Tuscaloosa, Ala.

Both Gaetzes remain in the Florida legislature. And Matt Gaetz said he keeps in touch with Scarborough via periodic phone calls and text messages, and considers him a mentor.

The Beltway debate over whether journalists should refrain from contributing to campaigns should take a backseat to the First Amendment, Gaetz said. “I don’t think you check your individual liberties when you step in front of a television camera or a microphone.”

Asked his thoughts on NBC’s policy of requiring employees to seek permission before contributing to campaigns, Gaetz said “That would be up to NBC not me. I’m a lowly state representative in Florida. I’ll let them make their own corporate policies.”

The Scarboroughs’ contributions to George Scarborough, an attorney, came in 2005, before he dropped out of a state legislative race, and 2007, when he lost in a primary.

After Olbermann’s donations were first reported by POLITICO, a search of campaign finance records also found contributions in Scarborough’s name in the amount of $4,200 to the Oregon congressional race of close friend Derrick Kitts in 2006, and for $5,000 in April to Alabama legislative candidate John Merrill, another old friend.

An MSNBC spokesman said at the time that the first donation complied with network policy because “Joe sought permission in advance.” And Scarborough’s co-host on “Morning Joe,” Mika Brzezinski told POLITICO, that it should have been recorded in the name of Scarborough’s wife. POLITICO was provided a copy of the bank transfer, which was dated April 9 and signed by Susan Scarborough.






Joe Scarborough Suspended Over Political Donations



MSNBC TV host Joe Scarborough was suspended without pay for two days Friday for making eight campaign donations to Florida political candidates, in violation of NBC News ethics policy.

Scarborough, a former Republican member of Congress from Florida and host of the cable network's "Morning Joe" program, said he agreed with the decision by msnbc President Phil Griffin, which was similar to the sanction Griffin imposed two weeks ago on another host on the network, Keith Olbermann.

When Olbermann, host of "Countdown with Keith Olbermann," was suspended Nov. 5 for making donations to three Democratic congressional candidates, Scarborough acknowledged that two political contributions had been made in his name, but he said they had been made by his wife.

Griffin said in a statement that Scarborough informed him Friday that he had in fact made eight contributions from 2004 to 2008 to local candidates in Florida that he did not recall.

"He will be immediately suspended for two days without pay and will return to the air on Wednesday, November 24th," Griffin said. "As Joe recognizes, it is critical that we enforce our standards and policies."

In his own statement Friday, Scarborough he had "recently" been made aware of the contributions and told Griffin about them himself.

Like many news organizations, NBC News, parent of msnbc TV, prohibits political contributions by its journalists without prior approval of the president. (Msnbc.com, a joint venture of NBC Universal and Microsoft Corp., also has a policy against its journalists contributing to political campaigns.)

"Anyone working for NBC News who takes part in civic or other outside activities may find that these activities jeopardize his or her standing as an impartial journalist because they may create the appearance of a conflict of interest," the NBC News policy reads.

"Such activities may include participation in or contributions to political campaigns or groups that espouse controversial positions. You should report any such potential conflicts in advance to, and obtain prior approval of, the president of NBC News or his designee."

Scarborough said he made the contributions to the candidates — his brother and three family friends — as "simple acts of friendship."

"I gained nothing personally, politically, or professionally from these donations," he said. Nonetheless, he said he agreed with Griffin's decision and said, "I apologize to MSNBC and to anyone who has been negatively affected by my actions."

Scarborough's reaction was in sharp contrast to that of Olbermann, whose suspension ignited a firestorm of protest from supporters who created an online petition that attracted more than 250,000 signatures. Olbermann apologized to his supporters but not to NBC News and broadcast a commentary objecting to having been punished "without a hearing."


Sources: MSNBC, Politico, Youtube

Charlotte vs Unions For DNC 2012: Unions Veto NO!!

Unions To DNC 2012: Shun These Cities: Charlotte & Cleveland


A Union representing hotel workers has asked the Democratic National Committee to rule out two of its four convention-site finalists, Cleveland and Charlotte, N.C., because they lack sufficient unionized hotel facilities.

"Among the DNC's four finalist cities, only St. Louis and Minneapolis" have the capacity to "house a large portion of the delegates and other guests ... in unionized hotels," John Wilhelm, president of the international UNITE HERE union of hotel and textile workers, wrote in a letter to DNC Chairman Tim Kaine.

"Therefore, one of those two cities should be the DNC's choice for 2012. Unfortunately, Charlotte and Cleveland do not fit the bill, and they should be removed from the list."

Though the letter was dated Oct. 6, it wasn't publicized until this week, when the union's Minneapolis local, eager to enhance its city's chances, issued a press release on the subject.

"We're just very interested in having the convention here on a number of levels, and for the international it's a priority that it be in a union city," said Wade Luneberg, secretary-treasurer and political director of UNITE HERE Local 17 in Minneapolis. "We think it's important to differentiate between the four [finalist] cities and see that Minneapolis and St. Louis rise to the top."

Charlotte, N.C., has no unionized hotels, and its convention center's employees are not union members, according to Wilhelm's letter. Cleveland has some union hotels, but only a handful in the downtown area and about 10 in the larger region; they belong to a competing union, Workers United.

UNITE HERE under Wilhelm split with former President Bruce Raynor in a bitter and protracted battle that ended last year with Raynor leaving and founding Workers United.

Workers United, which has affiliated with the Service Employees International Union, says it has 150,000 members, while UNITE HERE, an affiliate of the AFL-CIO, claims 265,000.

A subcommittee of the DNC visited potential convention sites over the summer to evaluate their logistical suitability and advise the committee on their findings. A decision is expected in late 2010 or early 2011.

Democratic sources familiar with the decision-making process say Charlotte and St. Louis are the current front-runners, with Charlotte at a slight disadvantage because of its small overall hotel room stock.

Political considerations — including last week's election results — are expected to play a major role in the decision-making process. The defeat of a Democratic governor in Ohio may have hurt Cleveland's chances, while Minneapolis could be helped if Minnesota's Democratic gubernatorial nominee, Mark Dayton, hangs on to win. He currently leads in the count in a race that is likely to go to a recount.

The Minneapolis area has at least 20 union hotels totaling 5,300 rooms, with more than 2,000 workers, Wilhelm's letter notes. St. Louis, the letter says, has 10 union hotels with more than 3,000 rooms. Both cities' sports arenas and convention centers are unionized as well.

"Employees at union hotels are far more likely than employees in non-union hotels to get the sort of basic fair treatment for which the Democratic Party stands — good wages, affordable health benefits, stable long-term positions, and respect and a voice on the job," Wilhelm wrote. "For these reasons, those employees are more likely to provide delegates and guests with better service as well."

UNITE HERE official Pilar Weiss said the DNC was receptive to the union's concerns. "It's early on," she said. "We're having a dialogue with them."

A spokesman for the DNC, Hari Sevugan, said, "As always, we are looking at a number of factors and will have an announcement in the coming months."





Union Vetoes Charlotte For Dems 2012 Convention


Charlotte’s bid to host the Democratic National Convention has gotten a “no” vote from the union that represents hotel workers, according to a report in Politico.com.

“Among the DNC's four finalist cities, only St. Louis and Minneapolis” have the capacity to “house a large portion of the delegates and other guests ... in unionized hotels,” John Wilhelm, president of the international UNITE HERE union of hotel and textile workers, wrote in a letter to Democratic National Committee Chairman Tim Kaine.

The letter, dated Oct. 6, wasn't publicized until last week, when the union's Minneapolis local, issued a press release on the subject.

Politico cites Democratic sources saying that Charlotte and St. Louis are now considered front-runners but that Charlotte had a slight disadvantage cause it didn’t have as many hotel rooms, period. But politics – including the mid-term election results – will play a role in the decision which is expected later this year or early in 2011.








Last Tuesday’s Results And DNC 2012


Figure in 30 days or so we’ll know if the Democrats are coming to Uptown in 2012. And on balance I think the Midterm election has helped Charlotte’s chances.

Cleveland is right out if it was ever in it. After both a lack-luster Obama rally in Cleveland the other day and John Kasich taking the governor’s race, forget it. The DNC is scared of Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, don’t think there will be much if any interest in trying to boost Obama to a second-term in Pawlenty’s backyard.

However.

There is already a meme in the wild that Tuesday was the result of Virginia Gov. Tim Kaine bending the DNC machine too closely to the “blue dogs” — ie, the South — instead of riding even further to the Left with organized labor. To the extent the Dems pursue this line of thinking that clearly sets up a Charlotte vs. St. Louis line of battle. If Kaine loses his job and is otherwise scape-goated for the midterm, that elevates labor-heavy St. Louis, which I’ve long thought is the only real competition for CLT.

Charlotte’s convention boosters have already had to try to prove that the city is organized labor-friendly enough to host the party of organized labor. Expect more surprises and twists there in the weeks ahead even if this get-Kaine movement dies out. (And frankly who knows what will go on while the White House is in India. Seriously.)

But the big picture remains that North Carolina has a female Dem governor, a female Dem senator, and only lost one incumbent congressman on Tuesday. Charlotte still has two Democratic congressmen — Larry Kissell’s win being something of a bright spot — a young, black Democratic mayor and a raft of long-serving and powerful state legislators. This reality along with Duke Energy and Bank of America, argues very well for Charlotte.

What is really interesting, however, is the chance that the GOP tide has made potential corporate donors to Charlotte’s DNC push a little gun shy. We’ve been told all along that $40m. in private money would be needed to put on Obamafest 2012 in Uptown.

After Tuesday, is there still a rush to write that check?






Republicans' New Clout Shakes Up N.C. Legislature


An election that turned the N.C. General Assembly upside down will flip the fortunes of Mecklenburg County lawmakers, dropping some from key positions and maybe lifting one to the top spot in the House.

Lawmakers on both sides Wednesday were still trying to figure out their roles on a playing field that changed dramatically. Constituents also were scrambling to find their places.

In a GOP wave that swept the country, Republicans took over the state Senate for the first time in 112 years, winning 31 of 50 seats. They'll retake control of the House after claiming at least 68 of 120 seats.

"Everybody in North Carolina is going to be trying to figure out how to relate to the new leadership," said Charlotte Chamber President Bob Morgan.

The results will change everything from the leaders who assign committees to the lawmakers who lead them and, in some cases, the staff that counsels them.

GOP Sen. Phil Berger of Rockingham County is poised to become the leader of the Senate. Rep. Thom Tillis of Cornelius, who chaired the party's election effort in the House, is on the short list of candidates for House speaker.

Veteran Sen. Bob Rucho of Matthews, one of the leaders of the GOP Senate campaign effort, is expected to get a top committee assignment.

On the flip side, lawmakers such as Charlotte Democrat Dan Clodfelter, who co-chairs the influential Senate Finance Committee, and deputy Senate President Pro Tem Charlie Dannelly almost surely will lose their leadership roles as well as their clout.

But what it means for Mecklenburg is less clear.

"I actually think it bodes pretty well for us," Tillis said Wednesday. "We shouldn't automatically assume Republicans will do what Democrats have done, and that is not have people in the minority party in prominent roles. We're not going to turn a blind eye to people who've established a pretty solid resume."

Tillis as House speaker?

Tillis, the minority whip, could end up competing with Minority Leader Paul Stam of Raleigh for the speakership. He says he expects the GOP caucus to decide its new leaders by Thanksgiving.

No one approached the election with quite the single-minded focus of Tillis.

It was in April 2009 that the Cornelius businessman quit his job as an IBM management consultant to devote himself full time to the effort. He put 45,000 miles and wore out a set of tires on his blue Toyota pickup traveling the state recruiting candidates and helping them hone issues and raise money.

The man who named his three dogs Reagan, Abe and Ike was on a mission: to elect Republicans.

Raleigh businessman Art Pope, a former legislator whose affiliated groups spent at least $2.1 million to elect Republicans, declined to say whom he favors for speaker. "The Republican House caucus has an excellent group of leaders, and they have a lot to choose from," he said.

But Rep. Ruth Samuelson, a Charlotte Republican also expected to rise in the new order, said Tillis has a good shot to replace Democratic Speaker Joe Hackney of Chapel Hill.

"I think right now it leans a little towards Thom," she said "That's what I'm hearing other people say."

Tillis and others say they don't believe Republicans would be wary about another speaker from Mecklenburg. He would be the first since Jim Black left in 2007, the year he was sentenced to federal prison on corruption charges. Black was just released to a halfway house.

"I don't think Thom Tillis deserves any blame for the corrupt criminal Jim Black," Pope said.

Mecklenburg influence

Mecklenburg's 15-member legislative delegation includes six Republicans. Returning are Rucho in the Senate and Tillis, Samuelson and Ric Killian in the House. The newcomers: Bill Brawley in the House and Tommy Tucker of Union County in the Senate, in a district that includes part of Mecklenburg.

While House Democrats such as Reps. Beverly Earle, Martha Alexander and Becky Carney have been around for years, the three returning GOP lawmakers were all elected in 2006. Even so, they could all move up in a Republican-controlled House.

"There is a good potential that Mecklenburg County will have a little more influence over what happens in Raleigh," said Samuelson.

Carney said the change could "bode well for Mecklenburg."

"It depends on the issues," she said. "It might have shifted everything upside down but, for Mecklenburg County, potentially you're still going to have those leadership positions. So hopefully it will not have any damaging effect."

Morgan, of the Chamber, said who's in charge may be less important than the challenges they'll face. Among other things, the state is staring at a budget shortfall of more than $3 billion.

"Regardless of which party won last night, that is the biggest issue that looms over any of us who care about the legislature or are dependent on the legislature," he said. "We're all going to be playing defense."





Legislative Changes On The Way In North Carolina Senate & House

N.C. Senate President Pro Tem Marc Basnight, D-Dare, has been one of the most powerful individuals in state government since the early 1990s, but his long reign as the Senate's top leader appears to be at an end.

Republican candidates for the N.C. Senate appeared to be taking over that chamber for the first time since 1898 and the party's candidates for the House appeared to be winning the House of Representatives for the first time since 1997 as well.

With an Anti-Incumbent mood running among voters in legislative elections, Democrats in North Carolina who dominated the General Assembly in the 20th and so far the 21st centuries will surely find Raleigh a far different place when the General Assembly reconvenes in 2011.

Democrat Bev Perdue will still be Governor for at least another two years, of course, but many things are likely to change

Republicans who have been thwarted in their legislative efforts will find a different atmosphere. The electoral change would open up new leadership opportunities for Republicans such as Sen. Bob Rucho of Charlotte and Rep. Thom Tillis of Mecklenburg.

The Senate changes include the biennial drafting of the state budget, for which Republicans have been laying plans for months to trim more than $3 billion from the state's roughly $20 billion operating budget. Some plans envision cutting up to 20 percent to make ends meet.

Perhaps just as important is the redrawing of congressional and legislative districts for the upcoming decade. Those districts must be revised every 10 years following the Census, and Republicans will have the chance to guide redistricting committees through the process for the first time in modern state history.



Also important to Republicans is Court of Appeals Judge Barbara Jackson's lead over Democratic Court of Appeals Judge Bob Hunter for the N.C. Supreme Court seat held by outgoing justice Ed Brady. Although these seats are nonpartisan, it's no secret that Jackson is a Republican, as is Brady. And her election would not only preserve a 4-3 Republican-Democrat split on the court, it will also give the N.C. court a majority of female justices. It's foolish to predict how justices will vote based on their political party, but it will comfort Republicans in redistricting lawsuits that the numbers at least appear to be on their side.

Democrats no doubt will now have second thoughts about their refusal to go along with Republican proposals in past years to create a nonpartisan commission to study demographic changes and draft new districts for the state's 13 congressional districts and 170 legislative districts. It will be another decade before districts could be redrawn, and Democrats will have time to ponder their lost opportunities - apparently from the back bench.



View Larger Map


Sources: Daily Kos, John Locke Foundation, McClatchy Newspapers, Meck Deck Blog, Minnesota Independent, NPR, Politico, WCNC, WRAL, Google Maps