A week from Tuesday, voters in Indiana (and North Carolina) won't just be casting votes in the presidential primary - they'll be choosing downballot nominees as well. In Indiana, the hottest race on the Dem side is the gubernatorial primary. It features former Rep. Jill Long Thompson vs. architect Jim Schellinger.

Long Thompson held Indiana's 4th CD for a couple of terms in the early '90s until she was swept out in the Republican wave of '94. Schellinger, meanwhile, is a fairly wealthy first-time office seeker (he runs an architectural firm in Indianapolis) who has given a lot of money to fellow Dems over the years. Schellinger out-raised Long Thompson about $1.9 million to $1.1 million through March 31st, but the two are locked in a tight race, according to two very similar recent polls:

Mike Downs Center for Indiana Politics at Indiana University-Purdue University Fort Wayne (likely voters, 4/14-16):

Jill Long Thompson (D): 47
Jim Schellinger(D): 41
Undecided: 12
(MoE: ±4.2%)

Research 2000 (likely voters, 4/21-24):

Jill Long Thompson (D): 48
Jim Schellinger (D): 42
Undecided: 10
(MoE: ±5%)

Both candidates are vying to take on Bush apparatchik Mitch Daniels, whose job approval rating in the Research 2000 poll had him underwater at 42-49. Due to "My Man Mitch's" unpopularity, prognosticators consider IN-Gov to be one of the hottest gubernatorial races this cycle. Cook (PDF) and Rothenberg both have this race as a toss-up, while CQ puts it in the next-most competitive category, lean Republican. The polls show why:

Mike Downs Center:

Jim Schellinger (D): 46%
Mitch Daniels (R-inc.): 47%

Jill Long Thompson (D): 47%
Mitch Daniels (R-inc.): 48%
(MoE: ±2.8%)

Research 2000:

Jim Schellinger (D): 44
Mitch Daniels (R-inc.): 45
Undecided: 10

Jill Long Thompson (D): 45
Mitch Daniels (R-inc.): 45
Undecided: 10
(MoE: ±4%)

As you can see, whichever candidate of ours emerges from the primary, we're going to give Mitch Daniels a real race this fall.

(Hat-tip: TXObserver & James.)

Race tracker wiki: IN-Gov

Debbie Wasserman Schultz in Miami Tuesday night:

Under fire from Democratic political activists and bloggers for not actively campaigning for three Miami Democrats, Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz invited the trio to a Miami fundraiser last night, introducing them to the assembled donors and politicoes.

Joe Garcia, Raul Martinez and Annette Taddeo all got invites to the Chef Allen's fundraiser in Aventura. Beneficiaries of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee fundraiser: four incumbent Democratic House members from Arizona, Pennsylvania, Indiana and California.

This is a good start, considering that just last week, DWS said she preferred "working behind the scenes to help those Democratic candidates but not - by not publicly coming out against my - the Republican incumbents." (See 1:22.)

However, it's not enough. This was merely an invite to a fundraiser for other candidates. What we've asked is for Debbie to endorse our South Florida trio without reservation, and throw fundraisers for each of them - just like she did for Ron Klein, just like she did for Suzanne Kosmas. Really, it's not that hard.

I think our pressure on this issue has helped push Wasserman Schultz in the right direction. Now she just needs to take a few more steps.

As you know, this week - the final week of the first fundraising quarter - Blue Majority is pushing to reach a total of 6,500 donations. We're getting there - following on the heels of our endorsement of Barack Obama, we've now moved past 5,800 donors. That means we need about 700 more, so if you haven't given yet, please do. Donations of all sizes are welcome.

There's also another way you can contribute. We'd like to solicit nominations for new candidates to add to the page. To be clear, this isn't a vote - we won't simply pick the people who get talked about the most. Rather, we want to get a sense of who our communities like, and why. We also don't have a specific timetable for adding new names, but we hope to choose some soon.

As a guide, here are some of the criteria we like to look at - some of these are old, and some are new:

Is the candidate running against a Republican incumbent or for a GOP-held open seat? (This is close to being an absolute requirement.)

Does the candidate embody the kinds of progressive values you'd ideally like to see in Congress?

Is the race not a top-tier affair? (Our dollars can go further in races which, so far, have received less attention and institutional backing.)

Has the local blogosphere embraced the candidate - and vice versa?

Does he or she pass the partisanship litmus test?

Is the Republican an easy target? (Think back to Tom DeLay.)

How blue is the district or state?

Please submit your ideas in comments - and again, please be sure to donate before the end of the quarter.

"Everyone else was told to sit on their bulletproof vests," Clinton said. "And we came in, in an evasive maneuver....There was no greeting ceremony, and we basically were told to run to our cars. Now, that is what happened."

- Associated Press, 3/17/08

"I certainly do remember that trip to Bosnia, and as Togo said, there was a saying around the White House that if a place was too small, too poor, or too dangerous, the president couldn’t go, so send the First Lady. That’s where we went. I remember landing under sniper fire. There was supposed to be some kind of a greeting ceremony at the airport, but instead we just ran with our heads down to get into the vehicles to get to our base."

- Clinton speech, 3/17/08

"[S]he evoked foreign battlefields, recalling a trip to Bosnia as first lady, when the welcoming ceremony ‘had to be moved inside because of sniper fire.’ She said she had traveled to more than 80 countries and was ‘on the front lines’ as the United States made peace in Bosnia and Northern Ireland and helped save refugees from ethnic cleansing in Kosovo."

- New York Times, 3/1/08

"I was the first, you know, high-profile American to go into Bosnia after the peace accords were signed because we wanted to show that the United States was 100 percent behind the agreement. We wanted to make it clear to the Bosnians of all backgrounds. Plus we wanted to thank our American military and our allies for a great job. So, we landed in one of those corkscrew landings and ran out because they said there might be sniper fire. I don’t remember anybody offering me tea on the tarmac."

- CNN 1/1/08

Clinton said she was "sleep-deprived" and "misspoke" when she said last week that she landed under sniper fire during a trip to Bosnia in 1996, when she was first lady.

- Pittsburgh Tribune Review, 3/25/08

Sleep-deprived... on all of these occasions? And she's the one telling us she'd be the best person to answer the red phone at the wee hour of 3 o'clock in the morning.

(Hat-tip to reader JS for the inspiration.)

Did anyone attend this fundraiser?

Please Join

Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz

Senator Nan Rich

Commissioner Sally Heyman

for a reception honoring

Suzanne Kosmas

Candidate for Congress, FL-24

"She is considered the first legitimate challenger to Feeney, whom Democratic insiders see as vulnerable because of criticism targeting him as one of the "most corrupt" members of Congress." Daytona Beach News-Journal, October 11, 2007.

Sunday, December 2, 2007

6:30pm to 8:00 p.m.

Sheraton Airport Hotel

Windows Room

1825 Griffin Road

Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301

Host $4600 • Sponsor $1000 • Friend $500 • Supporter $100-250

(donations in any amount appreciated)

I'm glad I didn't, because really, it would appall me to violate long-standing tradition like this. I'm a big believer in habeas corpus, I despise the designated hitter rule, and after all, it's my people that Tevye sings about. So when DCCC Executive Director Brian Wolff says:

Brian Wolff, executive director of the DCCC, says the bloggers are making "much ado about nothing," noting that it's "customary" for members to remain neutral in races involving GOP members of their respective congressional delegations.

I have to wonder what Debbie Wasserman Schultz is thinking. Clearly she didn't get the message.

UPDATE: Just to be clear: Suzanne Kosmas (the candidate Debbie Wasserman Schultz raised money for) is a Democrat taking on incumbent Florida Republican Tom Feeney. But according to Brian Wolff, it's "customary" for incumbents not to assist challengers to members of their state's delegation.

It's that time again: A week from today, all federal campaigns have to close the books on the fundraising quarter. This means that if you want your favorite candidates to be able to issue strong quarterly campaign finance reports, you've got to contribute by March 31st.

Now, I'll be honest - this is one of my least favorite parts of blogging, and it's certainly one of the less pleasant aspects of politics in general. But money still matters - a lot. If we want to expand our majorities in Congress - and especially if we want to see progressive change - we'll need a lot of cash to do so. Many big players - including labor unions, progressive organizations, and deep-pocketed donors - will look at these reports to decide which candidates to give to. It may not seem fair or even wise, but it's reality, and we've got to work the system as best we can.

So we're asking you to contribute to the Blue Majority candidates on ActBlue. These men and women are all strong progressives who are taking the fight to Republicans all over the country. Of course, they can't do it without our help, which is why it's the netroots' duty to get involved.

Right now, the Blue Majority page stands at about 5,500 total contributions (you can see the number right at the top). Our goal is to add a thousand more contributions by the end of the quarter so that we can hit 6,500 overall. The size of your contribution doesn't matter (though of course, we encourage you to give as generously as you are able to). We're looking for aggregate numbers of donors. As the Obama campaign in particular has shown, smart campaigns can get a lot of mileage out of small donors, especially those who give early on. (And it's still early.)

So please, stand up and be counted - make a donation to a worthy Democrat or three. And of course, if your favorite candidates are not on the Blue Majority page, we strongly encourage you to give to them at their own websites. Let's nail that 6,500 target!

The DCCC's Executive Director, Brian Wolff, recently posted on Democratic efforts to take three Republican-held House seats in South Florida over at the Huffington Post. As you are probably aware, there's been a tremendous amount of controversy over the fact that Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, co-chair of the DCCC's Red to Blue program, has recused herself from these three races, despite the fact that we have quality challengers in each. (Rep. Kendrick Meek has also abandoned these candidates.) Wolff had this to say about the controversy:

This is in keeping with Wolff's prior comments on how importantly he views this issue:

Brian Wolff, executive director of the DCCC, says the bloggers are making "much ado about nothing," noting that it's "customary" for members to remain neutral in races involving GOP members of their respective congressional delegations.

If you, however, take a different view of things, I encourage you to call or write the relevant parties and let them know:

Debbie Wasserman Schultz (campaign office):
E-mail: AskDebbie@DWSforCongress.com
Phone: 202-741-7154

DCCC Chair Chris Van Hollen (campaign office):
E-mail: chris@vanhollen.org
Phone: 301-942-3768

DCCC Headquarters:
Contact form
Phone: 202-863-1500

At a town hall meeting Tuesday night (it's a Congressional "district work period"), Debbie Wasserman Schultz had this to say about her abandonment of three strong Democratic challengers in South Florida:

I know there are people here that are interested in a political matter, so I will get that out of the way right at the beginning. If you have a concern about my previous comments about my staying out of the races in South Florida where candidates are challenging Lincoln Diaz-Balart, Ileana Ros- Lehtinen and Mario Diaz-Balart, I will tell you two things:

First off, I have not endorsed any of the three incumbents in South Florida, nor will I, and I do not support their re-election campaign. I am supportive of the Democratic candidates who are running against them. I have never said otherwise.

Second, I have a national role as one of three co-chairs of Red to Blue Program. All candidates, from Florida to Alaska, have criteria that have to be met to get on this targeted list. Let me guarantee that if they fulfill those criteria, these three Democratic Candidates will be part of our Red to Blue Program...period, end of story. We have three co-chairs in order to be able to spread the workload among us.  It makes much more sense to have someone from outside of one's own region to be able to make the hits necessary.  

But at the same time I am a representative of the 20th Congressional district of Florida, and I think it is absolutely my responsibility to work with my Republican colleagues.

But just one cycle ago, Debbie had an entirely different outlook - and with good reason:

While her moxie during debates over Terri Schiavo and Hurricane Katrina has earned kudos, it has also gotten the 39-year-old rookie into some trouble. She has rankled the longest-serving and most powerful congressman from South Florida, Republican Clay Shaw, by openly supporting his Democratic challenger.

Shaw's staff said he tried to welcome her to the Capitol by offering advice and temporary office space and was upset to learn that she was helping state Sen. Ron Klein raise money and meet party leaders.  

...  

Wasserman Schultz served with Klein in the state Legislature for 12 years, and they are close friends. She was tapped by Democratic leaders to help with recruitment and said she could not stay out of a competitive congressional race.  

"It's not good for my relationship with Clay Shaw, but Democrats can't afford to leave a seat like that uncontested," she said.

Why was it okay to do things that weren't "good for her relationship" with Clay Shaw, but not okay to do so with Ileana Ros-Lehtinen and the Diaz-Balarts? If Debbie Wasserman Schultz values "working with Republicans" more than expanding our majority in Congress, then she should step down from Red to Blue, regardless of how many co-chairs there are. Everyone running Red to Blue needs to be a partisan bulldog.

And, of course, if the shoe were on the other foot, would any of these three Republicans hesitate to stab Debbie in the back? Of course not.

(Hat tip: FLA Politics.)

I recently caught wind of the following:

Following a week in which the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) lobbed several attacks on Congressman Scott Garrett's (R-Wantage) skewed priorities, Congressman Steve Rothman (NJ-9) joined the General Wesley K. Clark, Teamsters Joint Council No. 73, New York Governor David Paterson, and numerous New Jersey political figures in endorsing Dennis Shulman's campaign to unseat Garrett in New Jersey's Fifth Congressional District.

"After meeting with Dennis and hearing about him from people throughout Northern New Jersey, I am convinced that he will make an excellent Member of Congress.  I am committed to working with Dennis in 2008 so that, together, we can help solve the problems of New Jersey and the nation in 2009," said Congressman Steve Rothman.

Did you catch that? Rep. Steve Rothman of New Jersey's 9th congressional district just the other day endorsed Rabbi Dennis Shulman, who is taking on Republican Scott Garrett in New Jersey's 5th CD. That is to say, an incumbent Dem endorsed a challenger running against a member of his own state's delegation.

But what does DCCC Executive Director Brian Wolff have to say about endorsements like that?

Brian Wolff, executive director of the DCCC, says the bloggers are making "much ado about nothing," noting that it's "customary" for members to remain neutral in races involving GOP members of their respective congressional delegations.

Quick, someone call up Steve Rothman! He's violating a long-practiced custom! How dare he! Does Chris Van Hollen know about this breach?

Seriously, folks, I think we know this "custom" is bullshit. Debbie Wasserman Schultz herself recognized this back in 2005, when she unhesitatingly supported challenger Ron Klein against fellow Floridian Clay Shaw:

"It's not good for my relationship with Clay Shaw, but Democrats can't afford to leave a seat like that uncontested," she said.

Scott Garrett is a total recidivist crumb-bum, and the people of NJ-05 deserve better. Rabbi Shulman knows this, and that's why he's running to replace him. And Rep. Rothman knows this, too, which is why he's backing Rabbi Shulman. Surely the good folks in South Florida deserve no less from Debbie Wasserman Schultz.

Race tracker wiki: NJ-05

The Washington Post has picked up on our frustration with Debbie Wasserman Schultz:

Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) is getting brutally walloped in the liberal blogosphere for refusing to endorse the Democratic challengers to three potentially vulnerable GOP incumbents in Florida.

Liberal bloggers are irate that Wasserman Schultz, who co-chairs the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee's Red-to-Blue program, has declined to endorse the Democrats running to unseat Cuban American Reps. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Lincoln Diaz-Balart and his brother, Mario Diaz-Balart.

Wasserman Schultz says she doesn't want to stab GOP members of her own delegation in the back. But liberal bloggers say she's killing her own while aiding and abetting the enemy.

I should note, of course, that it's not just the netroots who are up in arms over this - local Democratic leaders in South Florida are furious, too.

The DCCC's executive director, however, totally dismisses the concerns of both groups:

Brian Wolff, executive director of the DCCC, says the bloggers are making "much ado about nothing," noting that it's "customary" for members to remain neutral in races involving GOP members of their respective congressional delegations.

It may be "customary," but it's dead wrong - and Rahm Emanuel fought tooth-and-nail against that decrepit, lazy philosophy. Once upon a time, even Debbie Wasserman Schultz herself did, too. It's sad to see a proud, strong organization like the DCCC resign itself to tolerating this sort of absenteeism. I have to imagine Rahm's heart aches to see this.

Debbie, for her part, accuses us of getting things wrong:

Defending herself against the attacks, Wasserman Schultz told us, "The blogosphere sometimes turns into a game of telephone." She said the bloggers are missing a key point: "I have not endorsed any of the three incumbents, and I don't support their reelection campaigns."

Wasserman Schultz said she supports electing Democrats to Congress but that she has to "balance" her political role at the DCCC with her role as a member of the Florida delegation.

Of course, we never accused her of formally "endorsing" any Republican. We have, however, laid out a clear bill of particulars:

1. No Democrat should be permitted to recuse him or herself from campaigning on behalf of fellow Democrats - especially not the co-chair of the Red to Blue program.

2. No Democrat should gush to the press about how wonderful any particular Republican elected official is, especially not those targeted for defeat.

3. No Democratic party organization, the DCCC included, should tolerate either of the above two behaviors.

Debbie Wasserman Schultz is allegedly "frustrated" with us bloggers and wants us "off her back." (I can only assume this applies to the unhappy local Dems in S. Fla., too.) But if she really cared what we think, she or a staffer could have easily reached out to the netroots. Wolff's dismissive statement makes it pretty clear that we're seen as just a minor nuisance.

So it's time we made our voices heard. If you have a problem with the co-chair of the Red to Blue program saying she won't campaign for our excellent Democratic candidates Annette Taddeo, Joe Garcia & Raul Martinez, please let her and the DCCC know about it. Whatever you say or write, I urge you to be firm but exceedingly polite. Our message is strong and true - we don't need to cloud our cause by giving those in power an easy out to attack the messenger.

And what are we asking for? We want Debbie Wasserman Schultz to vocally endorse our South Florida trio and do everything she can to help them get elected (including hosting a fundraiser for each). If she won't do that, then we'd like her to resign from Red to Blue. And we also want the DCCC to stop tolerating Members of Congress who want to "remain neutral" in contested races.

Debbie Wasserman Schultz (campaign office):
E-mail: AskDebbie@DWSforCongress.com
Phone: 202-741-7154

DCCC Chair Chris Van Hollen (campaign office):
E-mail: chris@vanhollen.org
Phone: 301-942-3768

DCCC Headquarters:
Contact form
Phone: 202-863-1500

Please do not contact Congressional offices as this is purely a political issue. Just keep in mind what we're fighting for, be polite, and let's remind the folks in charge that our opinions matter.

Man, I sure do miss the Debbie Wasserman Schultz of old. Just one cycle ago, she was utterly unafraid to stand up for her party and campaign fiercely on behalf of her fellow Democrats:

While her moxie during debates over Terri Schiavo and Hurricane Katrina has earned kudos, it has also gotten the 39-year-old rookie into some trouble. She has rankled the longest-serving and most powerful congressman from South Florida, Republican Clay Shaw, by openly supporting his Democratic challenger.

Shaw's staff said he tried to welcome her to the Capitol by offering advice and temporary office space and was upset to learn that she was helping state Sen. Ron Klein raise money and meet party leaders.

...

Wasserman Schultz served with Klein in the state Legislature for 12 years, and they are close friends. She was tapped by Democratic leaders to help with recruitment and said she could not stay out of a competitive congressional race.

"It's not good for my relationship with Clay Shaw, but Democrats can't afford to leave a seat like that uncontested," she said.

What happened to DWS? Why are things all of a sudden so different? She took a big gamble taking on Shaw like that - Klein could easily have lost, and the Dems could very well have remained in the minority. Note that the article is from 2005, when Dem prospects didn't look nearly so bright as they later would. Also note the URL - Debbie was proud enough of that piece to re-print it on her own website.

Now, Debbie Wasserman Schultz has far less to lose - and yet she's being far more hesitant. In fact, she's being downright destructive toward Raul Martinez, Joe Garcia and Annette Taddeo, all in the name of "bipartisan comity." Debbie was right two-and-a-half years ago - Dems couldn't afford to leave a seat like Clay Shaw's uncontested. And they can't afford to leave FL-18, FL-21 & FL-25 anything less than vigorously contested this cycle, either.

It's not just the netroots who are up in arms about the fact that key South Florida incumbents Debbie Wasserman Schultz and Kendrick Meek are refusing to support fellow Dems Annette Taddeo, Joe Garcia and Raul Martinez. Local Democrats are outraged, too:

Two influential congressional Democrats from South Florida are coming under fire from Miami-Dade Democrats for sitting on the sidelines as the party seeks to oust three Republican incumbents.

Miami-Dade party members meeting late Monday to elect a new leader said they were dismayed that Democratic Reps. Debbie Wasserman Schultz of Weston and Kendrick Meek of Miami have decided not to publicly support the Democratic challengers.

"I was appalled when I saw certain elected officials think they have the right to anoint who can run," Bret Berlin said as he was elected chairman of the county party. "That's not their job, it's our job."

His words echoed those of North Miami Mayor Kevin Burns, who also ran for county party chairman. He told the crowd at the meeting that he couldn't "believe two of our elected Congress members have the nerve to stand up and say they won't support three local Democratic candidates."

Fortunately, party leaders in the area are having absolutely no trouble getting behind our three excellent candidates:

County Democrats say they may have their best shot in years to unseat at least one of the three, and after winning the county party's election, Berlin immediately moved to "pledge support behind the three Democratic candidates."

The more than 100 party executive committee members who assembled at the American Legion Hall in Miami unanimously agreed.

But rather than upbraid Wasserman Schultz and Meek for their embarrassing attempts to recuse themselves from these vital races, the DCCC has signalled its assent:

The national party has said it's "very excited" about the races, and Jennifer Crider, communications director at the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, said the party has made similar arrangements when other members of Congress have conflicts.

"It doesn't change our level of commitment in any way or diminish it," Crider said. "Members [of Congress] have to do their own politics as well. We completely understand they need to do what's best for them and their constituents."

How utterly dismaying. Anyone who has read The Thumpin' knows how bitterly Rahm Emanuel fought against this insulting practice. Attitudes like Meek's and Wasserman Schultz's were one reason the Dems languished in the minority for twelve years - and, if they aren't curbed now, will be a reason we don't expand our majority.

What's more, Meek & DWS sit in totally safe districts. In Debbie's home base of FL-20, voters chose Kerry over Bush by 64-36 in the last election. Meanwhile, in Meek's FL-17, Kerry was favored by an almost hilarious 83-17 margin. So the idea that DWS and Meek could possibly be doing "what's best for them and their constituents" by kneecapping strong challengers and damaging the Democratic Party's prospects is totally ludicrous.

As I've said before - and as I won't stop saying - Debbie Wasserman Schultz either has to completely change her tune on this and vocally embrace our challengers, or step down from the DCCC. And for his part, Kendrick Meek should do the same. South Florida Democrats - and the whole party - deserve nothing less.

Mario Diaz-Balart, attacking SCHIP:

In a flame-fanning tirade on Spanish-language radio last week, Díaz-Balart called the tax hike [to pay for SCHIP] an "attack on the Cuban-American community." He added: "It would hurt an industry specifically in Miami-Dade, in South Florida, an industry that is almost entirely Hispanic: those who make cigars by hand, which is a cultural tradition. That industry will not survive."

Lincoln Diaz-Balart, disrupting Tom Lantos's memorial service:

The House had a meltdown today in the middle of the memorial service for the late Rep. Tom Lantos, a Holocaust survivor who was chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee. The service, in the Capitol's historic Statuary Hall, was disrupted when a Republican House member unexpectedly called for a procedural vote.

And that's when all hell broke loose.

House Democrats were furious, charging the procedural motion was disrespectful. "Very bad taste, very" as one senior House Democratic aide put it.

Republicans were apparently worried that Democrats were about to force debate on contempt-of-Congress citations against White House Chief of Staff Josh Bolten and former White House counsel Harriet Miers. Rep. Lincoln Diaz-Balart (R-Fla.) is the member who hit the panic button, so to speak, and called the procedural vote. His real purpose in calling the procedural motion was to protest the lack of a vote on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act - before the contempt debate started.

Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, grandstanding about that stupid Petraeus ad:

The chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, R-Fla., said the ad "is outrageous and it is deplorable" and called upon her "colleagues on both sides of the aisle" to condemn the ad and, somewhat inexplicably, to apologize to the general for the impugning of his integrity.

Democrats everywhere know that we don't need people like this in Congress. It goes without saying that the DCCC leadership should realize this, too.

The good news: Top Dem brass sent letters of support to our three South Florida candidates - Annette Taddeo, Joe Garcia & Raul Martinez - who are each offering stiff challenges to incumbent Republicans.

The bad news: The DCCC seems to think that this is an adequate response to our complaints and those of local Democrats. Here's why we still have a host of problems:

1. The DCCC has not in any visible way reprimanded Reps. Kendrick Meek and Debbie Wasserman Schultz, who previously said they would not assist our three candidates. This amounts to a tacit acceptance of an unacceptable practice - ie, allowing incumbent Democrats to recuse themselves from helping challengers and expanding our majority. There are no recusals in politics.

2. Debbie Wasserman Schultz is still a co-chair of the Red to Blue program. This initiative is specifically tasked with increasing the ranks of Democrats in the House. Anyone running this program simply cannot refuse to support particular Democrats. We need someone in charge who will unhesitatingly embrace every worthy challenger. Besides, how can Wasserman Schultz objectively evaluate potential Red to Blue participants if she's already pre-disposed against certain campaigns? She's had a week to change her tune; the fact that she hasn't yet is a strong sign that she is the wrong person for this job.

3. Wasserman Schultz didn't just recuse herself from her responsibilities - she also "cracked out of turn" and lavished praise on one of the Republicans in question, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen. Why on earth would a supposedly good Democrat sabotage our party's chances by giving a recidivist Republican such a perfect, ready-for-TV soundbite? As many commenters have pointed out, no Republican would heap such compliments on one of us - and if they did, they'd have no problem stabbing us the very next day. Another sign that she is the wrong person for this job.

I don't think it's too much to ask that the chair of the Red to Blue program be a partisan bulldog at all times. That's what the job calls for. If Debbie Wasserman Schultz can't or doesn't want to perform these sorts of duties, then she needs to be relieved of her position.

But on a broader level, the DCCC cannot accept these sort of faint-hearted recusals by anyone. It's not enough to say "Well, if X won't help out, we'll send Y instead." This is a team, and every member of the caucus has to play. Rahm Emanuel fought bitterly against the "but I don't wanna" crowd, and with good reason. Toleration of this special pleading is one reason we spent twelve years in the wilderness; Rahm's battle against it is a reason we finally took back the majority last election.

Don't get me wrong: I'm glad that Pelosi, Rahm and Van Hollen have all affirmed their support for our South Florida trio. But I expect more from the DCCC and our caucus.

Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D?) has been busy kneecapping some of our best challengers this cycle. Amazingly, she is part of the DCCC leadership  - she's currently co-chair of the Red to Blue program, which is tasked with helping our most promising challengers. But this isn't the first time we've seen something like this. From Naftali Bendavid's The Thumpin' (p. 78-79):

"I've got hundreds of examples of members screwing us. I've got members telling our challengers, 'I won't help you to challenge that X Republican.'" Emanuel continued, "I did say to one colleague once, 'You have an interesting concept of the word team. But when they come after you, I'll remind you of what you said to me. Because they will come after you.' I can give you chapter and verse of people acting like knuckleheads."

In one example, Congressman Adam Schiff of California, who served on the DCCC's recruitment committee, declined to recruit a challenger to a California Republican congressman. Schiff explained that he was seen as a bipartisan type and wanted to keep it that way. "I thought Rahm was going to strangle him," said the staffer who recounted the story. "I'm sure you've seen that look before." (Emphasis added.)

It's pretty stunning to me that anyone who would take on a leadership role in the DCCC would be so willing to undermine the cause. Yet where we had Adam Schiff dragging his feet last cycle, we now have Debbie Wasserman Schultz doing the same - if not worse - this time out.

This job is not for the faint of heart. Rahm Emanuel knew that. As Larry Sabato said of Rahm in The Thumpin', "You need someone whose favorite word is not a or the but fuck." In other words, we needed a hardass - and we got one, and we won. Rahm did not tolerate sandbagging, whether from Adam Schiff or Alcee Hastings or anyone else.

And we need Chris Van Hollen, the current DCCC chair, to have the same zero-tolerance policy. We know that he has a very different approach from Rahm, but being a hardass isn't about cursing, or withering glares, or high-decibel rants. It's about not accepting bullshit from people who want to call themselves your fellow Democrats, whether backbenchers or leaders.

By whatever methods he chooses, Van Hollen needs to make Debbie Wasserman Schultz fall in line. If we want to expand our majorities this fall, we can't have party leaders holding us back. Health insurance, stem cell research, global warming, the war in Iraq - these are all issues which Democrats are champing at the bit to address. Surely Chris Van Hollen can't let Debbie's personal friendships with the likes of Ileana Ros-Lehtinen stand in the way.

So sayeth Debbie Wasserman Schultz:

"I can't say enough good things about Ileana Ros-Lehtinen."

I wonder, exactly, what sort of good things Debbie Wasserman Schultz can't say enough of about her BFF, Republican Ileana Ros-Lehtinen.

Perhaps it was Ileana's vote to repeal the estate tax? Hmm, Debbie voted no on that one.

Ileana's vote to approve weak fuel efficiency standards for cars? Nope, Debbie voted in favor of stricter rules.

How about drilling in the Arctic Wildlife Refuge? Debbie certainly doesn't support that - but Ileana does.

I know that Debbie voted against making the PATRIOT Act permanent. I just checked, though, and Ileana voted in favor of it.

Now, what about CAFTA? Maybe Debbie approves of Ileana's support for the bill? Naw, Debbie gave a thumbs-down there.

Alright, alright, let's see. The House had a big vote on the McGovern bill last year, authorizing withdrawal of our troops from Iraq. Debbie was in favor... Ileana, not so much.

Maybe the Military Commissions Act - you know, the bill which eviscerated habeas corpus rights? Debbie said ixnay. Ileana? All for it.

I've got it. Warantless wiretapping - that's the ticket. Debbie sensibly said "no" when this bill came up in the House last summer. Ileana... oops, she vote for it.

Okay, this is an easy one. What reasonable person opposes stem cell research? Not Debbie, of course. And surely not Ileana, right? Sorry to disappoint - she thinks that blastocysts = human lives.

Man, I'm almost out of ideas, but I still have one more. Debbie obviously voted in favor of SCHIP - only the worst crumb-bums could possibly be so heartless as to deny healthcare to kids. But damn, wouldn't you know it - Ileana is indeed exactly that sort of crumb-bum.

On the major issues of the day, these women are far, far apart. Debbie, to her credit, strikes a strong progressive stance. Yet Ileana, despite her allegedly "moderate" image, stands with the worst of the GOP in supporting endless war in Iraq and continued environmental degradation while opposing stem-cell research and healthcare for kids.

It seems to me that saying even one good thing about Ileana Ros-Lehtinen would be more than enough, yet Debbie Wasserman Schultz just can't get her fill. It's clear to any rational outside observer that Ros-Lehtinen stands in the way of progressive change, and that Annette Taddeo's candidacy is our best shot at removing that roadblock we've had in a long time. Why can't Debbie see that?

I'm getting a lecture on recruitment when A, you haven't done a goddamn thing and B, we've got a [Republican] target and you're out there kissing his ass in the press?

- Rahm Emanuel (The Thumpin')

I can't say enough good things about Ileana Ros-Lehtinen; she has been my friend since I was first elected to office.

- Debbie Wasserman Schultz (Miami Herald)

You see, in my trade, this is called - what you did - you cracked out of turn. Huh? You see? You crumbed the play.

- Joe Mantegna (House of Games)

Why is a co-chair of the DCCC's Red to Blue program blathering to the press about her inability - nay, refusal - to help fellow Democrats? If this truly is such a sensitive issue, Debbie Dubya could at least have kept things quiet and handled matters privately in Chris Van Hollen's office.

Instead, for no reason at all, she chose to make a big public mess of it. And things like this have serious repercussions:

However, Stuart Rothenberg, editor of the Rothenberg Political Report, which tracks political campaigns, said the lack of support from top Democrats could make donors leery.

"Debbie Wasserman Schultz is a favorite of leadership, somebody on the move,'' Rothenberg said. "When somebody like that doesn't want to be a major player in taking on a Republican, that's a signal."

No shit. Bizarre public confessionals like Debbie Dubya's can have a devastating impact on promising challengers like our South Florida trio, especially with big donors and establishment players. Is it too much to ask key Democratic leaders not to air their dirty laundry down at Lincoln Road Mall?

Debbie Dubya herself said: "At the end of the day, we need a member who isn't going to pull any punches, who isn't going to be hesitant." We also need someone who is savvy enough to know when to keep his or her mouth shut for the duration of the campaign cycle. It's bad enough that Wasserman Schultz is kneecapping excellent candidates. Her inability to refrain from "cracking out of turn" is another reason why she should step down from her post - unless she does a 180 on this, and vocally supports Raul Martinez, Joe Garcia and Annette Taddeo, just like proud Democrats everywhere are doing.

A key leader of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, by her own admission, has a serious conflict-of-interest:

The national party, enthusiastic about the three Democratic challengers [in South Florida], has not yet selected Red to Blue participants. But [Debbie] Wasserman Schultz has already told the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee that if any of the three make the cut, another Democrat should be assigned to the race.

Let's leave aside for a moment that the first part of this statement is incorrect - the first round of Red to Blue challengers has already been announced. It's the second sentence that troubles me.

Debbie Dubya co-chairs the Red to Blue program. She has a major say in who gets tapped for it. Yet here she is saying she wouldn't help three awesome candidates - Joe Garcia, Raul Martinez, and Annette Taddeo - if they get picked for that program. But if she's already so hostile to the idea of them running, don't you think she might steer the D-Trip away from choosing any of these three for R-to-B status in the first place? How can these three get a fair hearing?

This is a major conflict of interest, one which threatens to hurt not just our South Florida trio, but the fortunes of the Democratic Party as well. I also think it undermines the DCCC's broader efforts, too - for instance, which other potential recruits might shy away from running if they thought that the scales were tipped against them?

As James Hell said, there are no recusals in politics. Debbie Dubya has to buck up, heartily endorse all three candidates and throw fundraisers for each of them. If she can't do that, then she is hopelessly unqualified to perform her job at the DCCC.

An enraged Rahm Emanuel once thundered: "[W]e've got a [Republican] target and you're out there kissing his ass in the press?" Rahm didn't accept this kind of bullshit from Alcee Hastings, and Chris van Hollen shouldn't accept it from Debbie Wasserman Schultz. She needs to change her tune, or take a seat on the bench.