When I last posted, the topic of conversation was Adrian Fenty and Michelle Rhee. The last time I wished to post was around the same time the Eddie Long controversy broke. Then I got sidetracked. I’ll get back to those topics ASAP, but what occurs to me today is that Deval Patrick is presidential timber.  If he wins in November, and it looks dicey right now, he could mount a campaign to succeed President Obama. This question of succession is one that has concerned me for some time even though it is decidedly premature.

Two people immediately came to mind, neither was Hillary Clinton. Both were women. Homeland Security Janet Napolitano and Senator Claire McCaskill are two logical choices in my view of logical successors to Obama. First, both endorsed him over Hillary Clinton, and both are younger than she is. Both women are centrists. Both women are natural executives and highly decisive people. McCaskill, the conservative of the two, is a radical centrist and her Senate votes are a little more to the center right than I am comfortable with, but it positions her perfectly for re-election and a national run.

Claire is articulate, no nonsense and a commanding presence. My favorite example of her leadership style is the way she scolded an enormous crowd during a health care forum for their churlish disrespect.  She came across as an angry mother that one should be wary of attempting to cross. McCaskill credits one of her daughters for pushing her to endorse Senator Obama and reassess his potential to lead the nation. Today, if I had that child’s ear, I’d be whispering that she should be telling her mom to prepare herself to run for president.

Janet Napolitano, by contrast, is the single and childless professional woman that Americans have been bred to fear. Napolitano is a kind of female Obama because she is a trailblazer. The first Democratic woman to be elected Governor in the Southwest, she was also the first woman appointed both U.S. Attorney and elected Attorney General. She is now the first woman to become Secretary of Homeland Security. The agents of patriarchy tell us that we have something to fear from such a woman as Napolitano because she apparently is fearless, competent, but more importantly, single and childless. Stepping into the role of national father as President will supposedly be problematic for her. With a fairly deep and resonant voice, she oozes authority. She even sounds Presidential. I can think of no real problems with her being President and can think of no woman better prepared for the job of leader of the free world.

Neither of these women, however, leads with her heart. Neither is known as a progressive. At my core, that is who I am, and that is who I want to lead my country. If I ever write a book, it will not be about Harold Ford, Jr. It will be about making the case for electing a progressive to the White House. That is the book I was meant to write, not a negative screed, entertaining though it may have been, about a corporate whore like Ford.

Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick is the kind of progressive candidate I could enthusiastically get behind. Most of us Negroes never seriously entertained the possibility of electing a black president much less two brothas from Chicago, but Patrick is capable of being elected President because he is so damn talented. First, the brotha is a compelling public speaker that rivals the President in his ability to move people. Second, he is blazing a path of progressive governance that Obama, bless his heart, is not. I do not know what his foreign policy views are, but Deval Patrick would make an excellent President because he is all of the things progressives projected onto Obama that he never was. I respect and admire Barack Obama and will work hard to get him re-elected. However, after two years, I realize that he is not the president I wanted, despite his extraordinary gifts and stunning accomplishments.

For awhile I’ve been telling friends that Obama is the only black president we’ll ever live to see or that there will ever be so we might as well be happy with whatever he does, even though I have not been happy bout a number of things. Today, I feel as I might have been wrong about that, and that gives me hope.

77 thoughts on “2016

  1. rikyrah

    you’ve given me something to think about SB.
    I’ve liked Deval Patrick for years, and am rooting for his re-election. He was one of the reasons I said Barack Obama decided to run for President in 2007.

    • The Democrats need NEW BLOOD, not a replay of the Clintons, especially Hillary who is still bitter.

      Outgoing Oklahoma Governor Brad Henry (D) is a possible presidential contender for 2016 unless he runs for the United States Senate when Coburn retires or maybe in 2014 IF Inhofe calls it quits.

      Mark Warner of VA is staying in the Senate until he dies, so he’ll win reelection in 2014 and again in 2020 unless he seeks the governorship again in 2017.

    • Zeitgeist9000,

      Hillary isn’t ready to commit to another term as Secretary of State if Obama wins re-election and she is asked, so I don’t think she will run for President in 2016 pushing 70.

  2. Skeptical Brotha, I hate to crash the party but Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick (D) is in the race of his LIFE, he’s only leading by 5 points according to the recent poll and Baker is breathing down his neck while Cahill is tanking, but both are likely to split the anti-Patrick vote causing Patrick to win reelection with a plurality of around 46-47 percent down from his 2006 landslide margin of 56 percent four years earlier.

  3. rikyrah

    1. You going to do a column on these bitchasses in the Democratic Party calling for Kendrick Meek to step out of the race to help Charlie Crist?

    2. You gonna do something on Unca Clarence’s Miss Anne thinking she could just up and call Anita Hill and it’s ok, cause she’s Miss Anne? I really would appreciate if you would connect all the financial dots here, showing how Unca Clarence is bought and paid for.

  4. Burroughston Broch

    I don’t believe that you will see any of them as President unless they move more toward the center. That was the only way Bill Clinton could have been re-elected in 1996. President Obama will have to do the same if he wants another term.

  5. Franko

    Did you see Brotha Ford on Meet the Press this morning, talkin bout don’t worry where the money’s coming from…HA!

  6. Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick (D)’s lead in the polls has shrunk to only 4 points over Chris Baker (R) while MA State Treasurer Tim Cahill (Indy)’s bid as a 3rd party candidate has backfired and he’s now polling at 8 percent.

    Nate Silver of 538.com is predicting Patrick will get reelected, but BARELY.

  7. Burroughston Broch

    The people of Massachusetts are realizing that Gov. Patrick and his progressive (formerly known as far left liberal) politics are not in wide favor outside their state. Some had hoped to pass him on to Washington after one term as Governor, but are now despairing of the chances. At the same time, others are deciding that his one term as Governor is enough. It’s also interesting to note that Republicans are not excited about former Governor Romney’s as a candidate for 2012.

    Massachusetts has run out of Kennedys.

  8. Burroughston Broch

    We will know for certain next Wednesday. Perhaps we’ll see the last Kennedy unwillingly retired as well.

  9. Burroughston Broch

    Blue Dogs, according to Rasmussen today, Patrick has 46%, Baker has 44%, Cahill has 6%, 3% prefer some other candidate, but just 1% is still undecided. Margin of error is stated as +/- 4%. Sounds like a dead heat to me. Anyway, we’ll know next Wednesday.

    • Burroughston, Suffolk Univ. had Patrick leading by 5 points: 44-39.

      Is there Patrick fatigue up there after only 1 four-year term as MA governor ?

      In the race for California State Attorney General, Kamala Harris is hanging in there, but she’s closely behind Steve Cooley.

      Jerry Brown is likely California’s next governor beating Whitman: 52-45.

  10. rikyrah,

    I hate to say it but neither Meek nor Crist can win while the other is in the race. And Crist polls much better than Meek in a head-to-head against Rubio. It’s all moot now since Rubio is going to win, but I wish Meek had dropped out a couple of weeks ago in order to save us from Rubio. He’s flat out nuts.

  11. Burroughston Broch

    @ TripLBee.
    The national Dems brought the Florida Senate situation on themselves, and have no one else to blame. Even if Meek dropped out now, Rubio would win handily because Crist is spoiled goods and Bill Clinton sowed so much discord. The national Dems proved that all they care about is having a winner obligated to them.

    • Republicans are 99.1 percent likely to take back the House tomorrow night and the Senate could also fall into GOP hands if Manchin loses in West Virginia and Murray somehow implodes in WA State.

      On the governorships, Larry Sabato is predicting Republicans will pick-up 14 Governors Mansions in Oklahoma, Tennessee, Michigan, Kansas, Wyoming, Iowa, Illinois, Florida, Oregon, Wisconsin, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Maine, and New Mexico.

      Democrats will pick-up 4 governorships in California, Hawaii, Minnesota, and Vermont.

      Connecticut is slowly slipping away from the Dems.

      In Texas, Perry is almost certainly heading towards a double-digit victory tomorrow night over White (55-41), which will position him towards the GOP nomination for President in 2012 in a crowded field.

  12. Burroughston Broch

    At the rate things are going, 2012 might be the year for Deval Patrick to run for President. President Obama is looking like a one-termer, unless he can move to the center like Bill Clinton did in 1996.

    • Franko

      I’m not sure why people aren’t getting the picture. They don’t want Obama to move to the center. They want his black @$$ GONE! If he moves to the center, he loses his base (the liberal wing, many of the young voters) in order to, what, gain more independent and conservative voters? YEAH RIGHT! I hate that everyone’s comparing him to Clinton: “Seek the advice of Clinton”; “Do what Clinton did after the ’94 elections”; well, Clinton did not get health care passed and Clinton didn’t have to take that extra mile that black folks do. It ain’t happening. If Obama does move to the center, he deserves to be toast for listening to all them white voices he got buzzing in his ear.

    • Obama has been governing from the center since day one. That’s been his primary problem. He shouldn’t have compromised (ie rolled over) for the banks. He should have pushed for a public option. He should have drawn down troops from Afghanistan. A substantial majority of Americans want to draw down in Afghanistan. An overwhelming majority want the flesh of the big banks. And most polls showed a majority of Americans in support of a public option. On each of these seminal issues, Obama has played to the center. Not only has he lost his base, but he’s ceded populist anger to the nit wits in the Tea Party.

  13. Burroughston Broch

    We’ll see whether ideological purity or the desire to have a second term is more important to the President. One thing to consider – there are a lot more people to the political right of the President than there are in his base.

    • franko

      That, I cannot deny. I still think that a majority of the people to his right want him gone, rather than compliant with the right.

    • He has been ideologically impure since day one. Perhaps should start acting like a progressive and see what happens. It couldn’t get any worse for him.

      • Burroughston Broch

        If he acts like a progressive, he will not be the Democratic candidate for President in 2012, much less be re-elected. The Democrats want an electable candidate above all else.

        Things could get worse for him.

  14. rikyrah

    Patrick won and nominated the first Black Chief Justice of the Mass. Supreme Court.

    and, I co-sign with Franko.

  15. Burroughston Broch

    It’s interesting that the “progressive” Governor of the “progressive” Commonwealth of Massachusetts is just now nominating its 1st black Chief Justice. From what I read, his confirmation is not a sure thing.

    In the “very red” State of Georgia, black female Chief Justice Leah Ward Sears served 2005-2009.

    Don’t always believe the label.

  16. Burroughston,

    Even the Dems aren’t dumb enough to run a challenger against Obama. And even if someone challenges him in the primary he/she won’t win.

    • Burroughston Broch

      TriplBee, you have been correct before, but I believe that you are wrong on this one.

      The Democrats realize that the President led them close to the edge of the cliff in this election cycle. If he and they remain disconnected from the bulk of our people for the next two years and they nominate him for re-election, after the election the Republicans will control the White House and both Houses of Congress, and perhaps have a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate.

      If the Democrats are as smart as you hope, they will have a Plan B ready in 2012. Despite the last 20 months, they are not all lemmings.

      • The Dems got wiped out because the economy is in the tank. It’s that simple. And there is a good chance that Obama will lose in 2012 because we are in a deep and long term recession. All of the economic indicators—except the Dow, which is vastly overvalued (move your 401ks to cash)—are horrible. Unemployment will remain a high for the foreseeable future. Consumer demand is anemic. Corporate earnings are mirage given that they are being built on cost cutting, which can’t go on forever. Even though Obama isn’t to blame, he’s the Prez. He will take the fall. The only chance he has is an economic turnaround, or a huge blunder by the GOP in the nomination process. If they get cocky and nominate a Tea Party-type candidate, Obama will win. If they are smart and nominate someone who is not widely viewed as an extremist (Romney—who they won’t nominate because he’s a Mormon, Pawlenty, even Jeb Bush) I think they’ll win.

  17. Anonymous

    I haven’t followed Governor Patrick’s work as closely as I should, but on TV, I always get the same ‘no back bone’ sense I get from the president. Is there anything to that with Governor Patrick, or is it just a demeanor thing?

    • Anon, I’m hearing outgoing United States Senator Evan Bayh (D-Indiana) might be planning a primary challenge to Obama or seeking the Indiana Governor’s Mansion in 2012.

  18. TripLBee, I see the GOP nominating either Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty (R), former Florida Governor Jeb Bush (R), or former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee (R) against Obama.

    On former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney (R), he does have the bucks (see Meg Whitman), so he can outspend Obama in TV ads, but we’ll find out if the Mormon issue will doom him again.

    PS: Los Angeles County DA Steve Cooley (R) holds a slim lead over San Francisco County DA Kamala Harris (D) in the open California State Attorney General’s office, according to the San Francisco Chronicle.

    • Huckabee would lose to Obama. As a Southern Baptist preacher who doesn’t believe in the theory of evolution, he’d be a turn off to independents. Pawlenty or Romney could win. But the Dems no longer hold the franchise on political self destruction. The GOP has caught the same virus so we’ll see.

  19. Burroughston Broch

    TriplBee, the economy is not the only reason why the Democrats lost heavily last week. Of course, they want the voters to think that, because then they can portray themselves as victims and take no responsibility. The voters didn’t buy what they were selling. They saw the President and the Democrats as being out of touch with the majority, and imposing policies and legislation that the majority clearly does not want.

    As far as the economy goes,, the Democrats are, in my mind, more responsible than the Republicans. They did their best to talk this country into a recession as a theme for the 2008 elections, beginning in earnest in 2007 when they took control of Congress,and succeeded. Unfortunately for us, they found that once you turn off the tap you cannot open it back up quickly, particularly when you have policies that make the tap stick. I am not saying that they were the only cause, but they were certainly part of it. Be careful of what you ask for, as you just might get it.

    • Burroughs,

      The economy teetered on the edge of a full blown depression because the banking sector collapsed into insolvency. (In fact, most of the big banks are still insolvent, but they’ve managed to hide that fact because the US govt and the Fed have soaked up so many of their toxic assets at face value, and because banks no longer operate according to the mark to market rule, which forces them to disclose the actual value of assets on their books.) The reason banks became insolvent is because Glass-Steagle, which effectively regulated the banking sector from 1932-1999, was repealed. Suddenly the Berlin Wall between commercial and investment banking was blown to shreds and grandma’s savings were being used to finance exotic derivative products that no one understood. And the banks really kicked it into high gear when they colluded with the ratings agencies to sell worthless mortgages as securitized debt, cut and sliced in so many ways, that they were nearly impossible to unravel.

      To your point, the Democrats and Republicans are equally guilty in what amounts to the legalization of real estate and securities fraud. And while the Republicans continue to embrace the ridiculousness of the arguments that led to this disaster, the Democrats haven’t so much as lifted a finger to re-implement Glass-Steagle, or otherwise protect us from the banking sector. At some point our banking sector will collapse again, since the problems have not been fixed, and then we will truly be fucked, as the public will riot before they allow another bail out.

      The Republicans have been genius in their ability to control the populist anger at the banks, while also doing everything in their power to support the continuation of the policies that now effectively have the banks writing legislation on Capitol Hill. And the Democrats have shown remarkable aptitude for cutting down the center in a way that alienates them from both the public and the banks. But the notion that the Dems are more responsible for this mess—which is far from over—is not accurate.

      • Kamala Harris is still further behind Cooley in the California State Attorney General’s race, so it looks like Cooley will be the ONLY Republican statewide officeholder come January 3, 2011.

      • Burroughston Broch

        TripLBee, you are in denial about why the Democrats lost, and you are not alone. It will be interesting to watch the progressives go through the process of grieving. Two things seem certain to me: (1) they will never again in my lifetime have the opportunity they enjoyed since January 20, 2009, and (2) they have no one else but themselves to blame for squandering their opportunity.

  20. TripLBee


    You are in denial about the fabric of the Democratic Party. They are far more centrist than progressive. That, and the poor state of the economy, are the primary reasons they were just wiped out.

    • TripLBee, Our Campaigns.com has Cooley leading Harris by 9,000 votes in the California State Attorney General’s race where he carried 40 out of 58 counties.

      • I think they have over a million votes to count. If it stays this close, my guess is that the loser will call for a recount. One way or another, Cooley can thank Citizens United for freeing up corporate sponsors for down ballot races. The corporations are terrified of Kamala.

    • Burroughston Broch

      TripLBee, surely you jest. Do you really believe that, had the Democrats moved farther to the left, they would have fared better in the recent election? How would the more numerous centrists voted? Why were so many of the Blue Dogs voted out?

      • I think the notion of moving to the left or right is itself intellectually bankrupt. Moving to the center, which is what Obama has done, is predicated on giving each side a little bit of what they want. Moving to the center doesn’t work when we’re in the sort of economic crisis which we are currently experiencing.

        I merely think that whichever party is in power, should deal with the root causes of our current crises. That isn’t being done by either party. Had Obama had the guts to re-implement Glass-Steagle, just to use one example, I believe he’d be better off politically. Is re-implementing Glass-Steagle moving to the left? Is re-implementing policy that worked well for 67 years the calling card of a leftist radical? I wouldn’t say so. I would simply say it’s a tried and true tactic. The deregulation that took place in banking, healthcare, media, etc. over the past 25 years, is not working. It has created a monumental crisis.

        If it worked I’d be all for it. I’m not reflexively opposed to de-regulation. But when it doesn’t work and has gotten us to the point where we are now, the sane thing to do would be to go back to what worked. I don’t see such a position—which is based upon empiricism and not ideology—neatly fitting into a leftist or a rightist paradigm.

  21. Why do wingnuts insist on saying Obama is some far left loonie and has not governed from the center? For God’s sake is Tim Geithner a socialist? You fools slay me!

    And Rassmussen tilted Republican in just about every single race this year. Deval Patrick nearly got 50 percent in a three way race and beat the Republican by SEVEN points. The Dems lost ZERO races in Massachussetts! So by the wingnut logic they should immediately seize all corporate assets in the state and declare a socialist agenda.

    Oh, and Kamala Harris now LEADS the race for California AG by 5500 votes!

    • THe reason that California has been almost exclusively Blue, no matter the national political climate (Schwarzenegger doesn’t count; he’s more action hero than Republican) is because the state is “majority minority”. The GOP isolated black voters long ago. Now they’re doing a bang up of isolating Latino voters.

      When the Republican Governor Pete Wilson, campaigned for Prop 187 in 1994 (a proposition so anti-Latino it would make Jan Brewer blush) he lost Latino voters for the California GOP for a generation. They are reaping what they’ve sown.

      The more interesting question, is whether or not what is playing out in California, will play itself out across the rest of the country. I say that in 10 years, Republicans won’t be able to win statewide elections in heavily Latino states like Nevada, Arizona and New Mexico. I think they’ll even have trouble in places like Texas. And even in states with smaller Latino populations, their communities are growing so fast, that they will be a constituency that needs to be taken more seriously.

      Remarkably, the GOP has been so hijacked by fanatics, that they cannot see the long term damage they are doing to their Party with this incessant Latino bashing. Even Karl Rove has tried to warn them. But they seem unable to help themselves. They are seething with hostility towards black and brown people and seem not to care that their day or reckoning will be upon them sooner than they’d like to believe.

  22. One thing’s for sure Burroughston Broch,

    Governing from the center didn’t win Obama any seats this go-round. If the Democrats had governed farther to the left, perhaps the benefits of their agenda would be more visible. That might have given them some leverage over the distorted message that the right was able to capitalize on.

    • Burroughston Broch

      Governing from the center? The President governed from left of center and that’s most of what caused the recent election losses. The only Democrats who see him as governing from the center are the far left, feeling betrayed because they didn’t get everything they felt they had been promised.

      I saw a newspaper article this morning that only 8 Democrats returning to the House had a higher election majority in 2010 than in 2008. Not a good sign.

      Also saw an article that Republicans hold a trifecta in 20 states versus 10 for the Democrats, a trifecta being that they hold the governorship and both legislative bodies. This means that the party holding the trifecta will easily control the redistricting for House seats. The Republicans also control most of the states gaining House seats while the Democrats control mostly states losing House seats.

  23. Burroughston Broch

    Blue Dogs, in California, as in Neverneverland, all things are possible. It’s a state that owes $10.5billion on its extended unemployment program and is borrowing additional money for the program at a rate of $14.5billion/year.

  24. Obama has been a dud because not only did Black folks and white liberals placed very few demands on him, but also allowed him to staff the white house with Chicago style political cronies and republican bankers. We should have judging from his record in politics suspected that his moderate views would be highly susceptible to cooption. But instead or organizing and
    shouting shame shame shame Obama we demand change,
    we just turned out heads or blamed the Tea Party Movement for organizing and fighting hard.

    But I look forward to hearing more about

    Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick

    • Obama’s critics will say that he never ran a city or a state and state 4 of his predecessors were governors (Carter-GA, Reagan-CA, Bush Jr.-TX and Clinton-AR).

      • Burroughston Broch

        Blue Dogs, it amazes me that Democrats, particularly black Democrats, treat President Carter with such respect. He was a an ineffective one term governor of Georgia, having run in 1970 a racist campaign against former effective Democrat governor Carl Sanders. You can check it out yourself by googling “jimmy carter” racist campaign governor. He then became one of our most ineffective Presidents and was roundly ejected in the 1980 election after one term. Today he portrays himself as morally superior to other living Presidents and practices anti-semitism.

        How soon we forget.

      • I guess I’m not old enough to remember Jimmy Carter as a racist governor (I was born in the 80s). I did look him up though. He was known for having a pro-civil rights stance. He appointed several black men and women to a number of positions across the country. He won the Nobel Peace Prize for his advocacy of human rights.

        I am, however, old enough to remember that Jimmy Carter spoke out against the racism geared towards Obama, more than Obama himself. And as an early backer of Obama, it’s hard to see why black Democrats WOULDN’T
        treat him with respect.

  25. Skeptical Brotha, Harris leads by 30,094 votes in the California State Attorney General’s race, but Cooley is determined to hope the conservative part of the state can pull him through.

  26. Burroughston Broch

    @ thinkinblack

    So President Carter gets a free pass on anti-semitism and past racism because he recently said that anybody who opposes President Obama does so only out of racism? I know a lot of people who have opposed President Obama from the outset and their views have nothing to do with racism. They are opposed to his lack of experience, his ideology, his policies and his governance. Their opposition has nothing to do with his race as they vote for blacks in other public offices. I don’t necessarily agree with their opinions, but I am absolutely certain that they are not racist. There are a lot more of them than there are people who oppose the President only because he is black.

    People like President Carter who characterize any opposition to President Obama as racism are a major reason why the Democratic Party is in such disarray. They try to portray complex issues as simplistic bias, and then to dismiss the objections. If not checked, they will lead to the self-destruction of the Democratic Party.

    • The way I read into your friends who “vote for blacks in other public offices” is that they don’t mind the negro coming inside for dinner. He just better know his place… and it ain’t at the head of the table. As for the Democratic Party’s state of disarray, I think the closeted racists are the ones leading to the Party’s self-destruction. That’s why the Republican Party appears to be more cohesive. They all agree that a black person’s place is not in the presidency.

      Anyway, patiently awaiting your next post Skeptical Brotha!

      • Burroughston Broch

        @ thinkinblack

        You seem to want to take my words, twist them and then take offense to them. In other words, you seem to love the feel of righteous indignation, however you can get it.

        Let me be very clear to you – the folks that you accuse of not wanting the negro at the head of the dinner table would gladly vote for the right black for President, as they would for the right hispanic. But they feel that President Obama is not the right person to be at the head of the table. They vote for the person and not the skin color. And the sooner you and the Democratic Party take off the blinders and recognize the real reasons for the present situation, the better off you’ll be. Blaming everything on racism is a cop-out, another side of the culture of victimhood.

    • Carter’s not anti-semitic. He simply believes that Palestinians should enjoy the same rights and protections as Israelis. He also accurately points out the advantages in money, power and media coverage enjoyed by the State of israel v. Palestinians in the Occupied Territories. Furthermore, he directs much of his criticism in this endless conflict towards the government of Israel, because, as an American, Israel receives more military, economic and moral support from the United States than any other country. Therefore, he holds them to a standard that comports with a free and fair society; a standard to which Netanyahu et al are not living up.

      • Burroughston Broch

        One small example to refute your assertion; there are many more.

        “Former President Jimmy Carter once complained there were “too many Jews” on the government’s Holocaust Memorial Council, Monroe Freedman, the council’s former executive director, told WND in an exclusive interview.

        Freedman, who served on the council during Carter’s term as president, also revealed a noted Holocaust scholar who was a Presbyterian Christian was rejected from the council’s board by Carter’s office because the scholar’s name “sounded too Jewish.”

        Freedman says he was tasked with creating a board for the council and with making recommendations to the White House on how best to memorialize the Holocaust.

        He told WND he sent a memo to Carter’s office containing recommendations for council board members.

        He said his memo was returned with a note on the upper right hand corner that stated, “Too many Jews.” The note, Freedman said, was written in Carter’s handwriting and was initialed by Carter.”

  27. Kamala Harris now leads the CA AG race by over 40,000 votes. The only votes left to count are in LA County where she is pummeling the Republican Cooley by 53 to 39 percent so far. Looks like this one is over, Congratulations to Kamala Harris!

  28. rikyrah

    Harris was declared the winner. Harris is the Attorney General of the State of California, even after Karl Rover spending 1 million bucks against her.

  29. Burroughston Broch

    @ TripLBee

    I enjoy discussion and debate between people of differing views, since no one has a chokehold on reality. If I agreed with everything stated here, then why bother participating since I’d learn nothing new?

    • Burroughston Broch

      Blue Dogs, whad’ya want? It’s only been a month and 4 days since the election. I guess the poll officials’ fingers must be frozen.

Comments are closed.