Case for Novick is still strong
(Please see Update/Correction at the end of this piece)
I’m supporting Steve Novick for the U.S. Senate and, after you’ve read this, I hope you will join me by making a financial contribution to him in any amount you can afford. Trust me when I say: Steve’s strengths are exactly what’s needed to defeat Gordon Smith next year.
Steve may be a dark horse—he may be up against a primary challenger favored by the chairman of the Senate Democratic Campaign Committee (DSCC)—but he’s a fearless truth-teller who’s just as opposed to George Bush’s coup d’état in slow motion as he is the timidity of Senate Democrats who are rolling over for the Buckaroo-in-Chief.
Those Democrats include that same chairman of the DSCC who helped give Bush enough votes to confirm a new attorney general who refuses to say water boarding is torture.
Steve Novick is as mentally tough and quick-witted as he is bright—a debater who’ll strip Smith of the patina of political moderation so painstakingly prepared over the years. A University of Oregon graduate at the age of 18, a Harvard-educated U.S. Justice Department lawyer who made his name suing polluters—nailing corporations who poisoned Love Canal—Steve has a razor-sharp mind and is faster on his feet that any candidate I’ve seen in years.
Your contribution—today—of $35, $50, $100 or whatever you can afford—will be a direct blow to the Republican Party and its man in the White House who, sworn to protect and defend the Constitution, treats the law as a set of suggestions for his consideration.
Read the words of Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), a former U.S. Attorney: In his assertion of power, Bush is essentially saying: “I don’t have to follow my own rules, and I don’t have to tell you when I’m breaking them. I get to determine what my own powers are. The Department of Justice doesn’t tell me what the law is, I tell the Department of Justice what the law is.”
Senator Whitehouse is describing despotism! Our country is literally being hijacked by a Republican Party that would destroy our freedoms to “save” them.
In the fight against this galloping psychosis, I believe Steve Novick to be the shrewder, tougher, better fighter of the two Democrats running for the Senate.
(This is no attack on Jeff Merkley, whom I could support at another time, in a normal era.)
But now is the time to put a tiger in the Senate. We had one once. Wayne Morse risked scorn, and probably sacrificed his seat, to defend the Constitution he loved and oppose the war he hated. We had another in Paul Wellstone of Minnesota, who braved ridicule for the same beliefs.
Steve Novick will be that kind of Senator.
Steve condemns the cynical Republican resolution in the 2003 session of the Oregon Legislature that simultaneously praised “President George Bush’s courage” in launching a first strike war against Iraq and supported “our troops.” It’s the kind of tactic the neo-conservative revolution has depended on—snookering enough Democratic support to inoculate Bush and his allies from effective political criticism. Steve Novick would have opposed that resolution; Jeff Merkley voted for it.
Jeff is a good man and does not support Bush or the war any more than Steve does. But Jeff took the GOP’s bait when he could have voted “No.”
Or, better, as House Minority Leader, Jeff could have out-maneuvered Republicans by engineering a Democratic Minority Report supporting the troops without glorifying Bush. Minority Reports are voted on before the bills to which they are attached; thus, it would have separated the issues, allowed Democrats to support the troops, and then oppose Bush on the war. It didn’t happen. This reveals a key difference between the Democratic candidates as we look for someone to effectively fight the neo-conservative putsch that threatens us.
Fortunately, Steve’s strengths are exactly what’s needed to defeat Gordon Smith, a very talented traditional politician.
In a debate between Steve Novick and Smith, Gordon won’t know what hit him.
Because the truth about Gordon Smith is this: despite a moderate vote here and there (which he often contradicts later), he is an enabler of the Republican hijacking of this country.
I’ve thought about this race for months. With alarm, I’ve watched the rising despotism of the Republicans for years. I truly believe we need Steve Novick in the Senate at this most dangerous of times. Please consider making a donation—today—by clicking on this link.
You’ll be glad you did.
Les AuCoin
[NOTE: I mistakenly named Jeff as House Minority leader when he voted for the Republican resolution that 1) praised Bush’s “courage” and 2) “supported” the troops. Jeff actually voted for the Republican resolution in 2003, when Deborah Kafoury was Minority Leader. Thus, though he could have worked for a Minority Report that separated the issues, he could not have done it from a leadership position. It is significant, however, that Minority Leader Kafoury, unlike Merkley, voted “No” on the resolution, seeing through the Republican ploy to use troop sympathy to put Democrats on record in support of Bush. Kafoury also supports Steve Novick over Jeff Merkley in this race. However, I regret my original error and have used a strike-over in the 14th paragraph to correct it.]
Les AuCoin
in Politics, Senate campaigns, Iraq War, torture, civil liberties, Steve Novick, Les AuCoin, Jeff Merkley, polluters, neo-conservative
|
16 Comments
View Printer Friendly Version
Email Article to Friend
Reader Comments (16)
The "bait" was the frame set up by the resolution. The only way to "take the bait" was to cooperate with the frame. An unqualified "yes" or "no" was what the frame called for.
An unqualified "yes" meant unqualified agreement with everything in the resolution.
An unqualified "no" meant unqualified rejection to everything in the resolution. The reason this was a highly desired outcome by the GOP is stunningly obvious - they wanted to be able to peg Dems as anti-military.
Jeff didn't cooperate, as his speech to his colleagues at the time makes abundantly clear.
Steve, by his own admission, would have cooperated with the GOP frame by voting "no" just as they wished.
By continuing to push this meme both Steve and yourself are reinforcing and cooperating with that same GOP frame.
Thank you so much for being a leader for Steve, Les--so that he can become a leader for all of us.
I think the comparisons to Wayne Morse and Paul Wellstone are apt; a Senator Steve Novick would be quite the force to be reckoned with.
You're right, we live in a dangerous era and the Congressional Democrats (with few exceptions) have done little but cave to the Bush Administration as they lead us further down the road to ruin. Steve Novick is exactly the kind of smart, principled and tenacious fighter we need in the Senate right now.
The disease is a tendency to accept the Republican framing of a controversial issue. e.g. "Those who voted no hate the troops!" -- WRONG.
It is braver and more honorable to call out the fraudulent Republican framing immediately, on the spot, and then repeatedly as necessary. I'd be much more impressed if Merkley had voted NO and then used his vaunted floor speech to make that point.
But I still wouldn't be voting for him. HR2 is the least of it.
As many have observed, including you, Les, Gordon Smith is a gifted conventional politician (just look at his electoral successes in Oregon, a state much more moderate than he is). Jeff Merkley is also a conventional politician, but one who is much less gifted than Smith. What is called for to defeat Smith is someone from another mold entirely: someone extraordinarily smart, extraordinarily fearless, extraordinarily principled, extraordinarily authentic, extraordinary in every way. That's Steve Novick.
Thank you, Les, for your leadership supporting Steve. He's going to be a great Senator.
http://www.blueoregon.com/2007/05/smith_08_les_au.html
But you've completely blown it here. You've gotten your facts all bollixed up - and it worries me that you've made conclusions based on bad facts.
>>> Steve saw through the cynical Republican resolution in the 2005 session of the Oregon Legislature that...
Sorry. It was in 2003. March 21, 2003.
>>> Steve Novick opposed that resolution; Jeff Merkley voted for it.
Do you have a single shred of proof that Steve even knew the resolution happened - much less that he opposed it at the time? (I think he was a policy advisor at the Department of Education at the time.)
For that matter, I don't think Steve's on record anywhere opposing the war as early as Jeff Merkley did. (I'm quite certain Steve is honest when he says he opposed it. He just didn't have an opportunity to do so in public anywhere.)
>>> Or, better, as House Minority Leader, Jeff could have out-maneuvered Republicans by engineering a Democratic Minority Report supporting the troops without glorifying Bush.
Sorry. Wrong again. It was 2003. Jeff wasn't the Democratic Leader. He got that post in 2005. Instead, in 2003, it was Deborah Kafoury, who has endorsed... wait for it... Steve Novick. (I should note here that Deborah voted against HR2.)
There's a looseness with the facts that concerns me here. I'm sure getting them right won't change your opinion or your endorsement - but let's not go confusing the record.
Maybe you're traveling. Benefit of the doubt. But rest assured that we're still awaiting your response.
<i>he may be up against a primary challenger favored by the chairman of the Senate Democratic Campaign Committee (DSCC)</i>
and
<i>Those Democrats include that same chairman of the DSCC who helped give Bush enough votes to confirm a new attorney general who refuses to say water boarding is torture.</i>
Just to refresh your memory:
1)When Novick declared, he said he'd "bow out" if and when a "viable" candidate emerged. It follows from that statement that the first Dem Speaker in almost a decade and a half who actually shepherded a razor thin minority through a host of progressive initiatives and repairs, does not meet Movick's standard for "viable" candidate.
2) Novick was one of the potential candidates who asked for DSCC support but was rejected in favor of Merkley. To then spend the next six months running against the DSCC is laughably dishonest, and speaks poorly of Novick's intellectual integrity.
Sour Grapes is not a moral stance.
With regard to Mr/Ms Ryan's comment, like beauty, "viability" is self-evidently in the eye of the beholder. Steve and I think he has it over Jeff.
So do former Oregon House Minority Leader Deborah Kafoury (D-Portland), Portland City Commissioner Erik Sten, Portland City Commissioner Randy Leonard, Former Judge Laura Pryor, Condon, Multnomah County Commissioner Jeff Cogen, Multnomah County Commissioner Maria Rojo de Steffey, Clackamas County Chair Martha Schrader, Clackamas County Commissioner Lynn Peterson (primary endorsement), Washington County Commissioner Desari Strader, Benton County Chair Annabelle Jaramillo, Superintendent of Public Instruction Susan Castillo (dual endorsement), Metro Councilor Robert Liberty, State Senator Ginny Burdick, State Senator Bill Morrisette, Multnomah County Auditor LaVonne Griffin-Valade, Portland School Board Member Bobbie Regan (dual endorsement), Pendleton School Board Member Elizabeth Scheeler, Former U.S. Attorney Kris Olson, Former State Senator Cliff Trow, Former State Senator Joan Dukes, Former State Senator Tony Corcoran, Former State Senator Tricia Smith, Former State Representative Bryan Johnston, Former Portland City Commissioner Gretchen Kafoury, Former Multnomah County Chair Beverly Stein, Former Multnomah County Commissioner Serena Cruz, Former Tillamook County Commissioner Sue Cameron, Former Metro Executive Mike Burton, Former Metro Councilor Brian Newman, Bob Stacey, Portland, Hans Michael and Robert Krum, MD, Portland, Mike Roach, Portland, Joy Marshall, Eugene, Fred Miller, Portland, Debby Kennedy, Portland, Susan Hammer, former president of Portland City Club Anne Philiben, Bend, Ann Wheeler, Bend, Cynthia Guyer, Portland, Pamela Echevario, Portland, Beryl Morrison, Portland, Holly Pruett, Portland, Tom & Mary Ruhl, Portland, Otto Schell, Portland, Jeff Allen, Ashland, Mike Williams & Linda Love, Portland, Linda Eyerman & Bill Gaylord, Portland, Stephen Piucci, Portland, Jonathan & Deanne Ater, Portland, Paul Kelly, Portland, Sheldon Rubin, Eugene, Margie Paris, Eugene, Nik Blosser, Portland, Nancy Becker, Portland, Chris Dearth, Portland, Joe Cortright, Portland, John Tapogna, Portland, Sara Byers, Roseburg, Frank Nelson, McMinnville, Gary Lahman, Newport, Leslie Carlson, Portland, L.C. Hansen, Portland, John & Shirley Vandermosten, Gresham, Lee Weinstein, The Dalles, David Bishop, Fossil, Celia Lorts, Fossil, Jerome Chicvara, Portland, Ben Fain, Aloha, Dana Hepper, Portland, Jane Hill, Pendleton, Jane Civiletti, Milwaukie, Thane Tienson, Portland, Ingrid and Vic Stevens, Portland, Beatrice Kohnle, Portland, Nancy Samson, Portland, Charese Rohny, Portland, Douglas Nichols, Portland, Mary Louise McClintock, Portland, Mary Carroll, Portland, Barbara Willer, Portland, Margaret Butler, Portland, Liz McKenna, Portland, Mary Wahl, Portland, Tricia Weber, Corvallis, Cheryl Perrin, Portland, Robin Shallcross, Portland, Loaded Orygun (Progressive blog), Denis Hayes, co-founder of Earth Day, Ashley Henry and Fran Storrs.
1)When Novick declared, he said he'd "bow out" if and when a "viable" candidate emerged. It follows from that statement that the first Dem Speaker in almost a decade and a half who actually shepherded a razor thin minority through a host of progressive initiatives and repairs, does not meet Movick's standard for "viable" candidate.
AuCoin answers the first point by posting a long list of endorsements. This of course does not answer anything.
It's just a list. Jeff has one too. Is it Steve's position that Jeff does not fit the definition of "viable candidate", or not? If so, then accept that he did a change up on his statement.
2) Novick was one of the potential candidates who asked for DSCC support but was rejected in favor of Merkley. To then spend the next six months running against the DSCC is laughably dishonest, and speaks poorly of Novick's intellectual integrity.
Neither AuCoin nor TJ addresses this one at all.
Just to be clear. Novick tried to get the endorsement from the DSCC and failed. Jeff got the endorsement that Steve was after and is now being harrassed all over the net for getting what Steve wanted.
Sour Grapes is still not a moral stance.
The answer ought to be obvious. Steve doesn't think Jeff is as viable as he is. End of story. Steve has lots of company, including rank-and-file voters who have him within six points of Gordon Smith in a recent poll, while Jeff trailed Smith by nine.
In the same poll, the Legislature had an approval rating of 30 percent, nearly as bad as Congress, which suggests the need of a talented outsider who has as a broad grasp of the issues as anyone in Oregon politics. That would be Steve, not Jeff.
As Steve Duin put it in a column on April 7:
"... Novick is savagely smart, issue-driven, relentless as a junkyard dog, easily underestimated ... and ... the only candidate in sight who can remove a red hot oven rack without a potholder.
"You can understand, I'm sure, why so many of the same old tepid, potholding Oregon Democrats are looking for someone else to challenge Sen. Gordon Smith, R-Ore."
Pat, your pot holder is showing.
On the first issue I will adjust my Way Back Machine's version of Steve's postion at the time that I accepted his invitation to attend his announcement at the union hall, to have been:
That he would step down if a candidate MORE VIABLE THAN HE were to enter the race, rather than ....you know......what he actually said.
Just guessing wildly here, but it may be that there is not a human being on the planet that meets Steve's (and your) more recently amended criterion.
***********
Oh, yeah, still waiting to hear about Steve's change up on his views of DSCC support. Apparently he was for it before he was against it.
So far it seems to be about which feet shoes are on.
***********
Sorry, Les, couldn't figure out how to beat another rotation out of the "potholder" analogy.
Haven't written to you in many years (I am the one you supported who ran against Mike Ragsdale, who then dropped out and Mary Alice Ford dropped in; also coordinated some of your college campus campaigns in the 70's) and just wanted to let you know I support Steve Novick, too. Gordon Smith MUST be defeated. Steve is the one to do that, and will be a wonderful Senator from Oregon who will represent ALL Oregonians, not just the special interest groups.
I send you and all Democrats my best wishes for a Very Blue 2008!
Sincerely,
Toby Padgett,
Tigard, OR