Uncategorized

To the Point on Lappin

ArchPundit August 7, 2007 No Comments

As an added bonus–Dan Seals position paper on Israel which is solid.

The continuing issue of attacking Kos for a limited number of comments compared to millions made is getting sillier every day.  James Boyrce Responds in a diary at Kos

One of the many things wrong in the world today is that some people, in this case supporters of Congressman Mark Kirk (Republican Illinois) are quick to wave the charge of racism without a thought in the world as to whom they are charging, and how those charge might feel.

During the Kerry Campaign in 2004, I spent quite a bit of time traveling with Cam Kerry, John’s brother, who converted to Judaism when he got married. Many of those trips also involved my friend Jay Footlik, who was the campaign’s Middle East Advisor.

The times I spent learning about this issue was the deepest and most personal exposure I had ever had to the historical and present challenges facing members of the Jewish faith and the country of Israel

I recall, vividly, as I sat there speechless, in a Holocaust Memorial service in New York City with Cam, Jay and his wife, a native-born Israeli as I watched Holocaust widows shuffle past us; small, frail, yet immensely powerful women – each and every one of them.

As such, I take the charge leveled by a supporter of Mark Kirk’s very seriously. And I find it very disturbing that it would be so easily bandied about.

Almost immediately as YearlyKos ended, one of Mark Kirk’s biggest supporters, a gentlemen by the name of Andy Lappin sent an email out to a very large list and it is making its way around the Internet.

Here are some of the quotes and charges that Mr. Lappin felt he needed to make about Jay, and Dan Seals, Jay’s primary opponent in the Illinois 10th, and their appearance at YearlyKos.

What’s troubling is that Seals and Footlik speak to our community with one mouth and then run to a convention filled with anti-Semitic bloggers.

The charge of being an anti-Semitic is one that should never be made lightly and certainly one that should never be made of a group of 1,500 people – many of whom, like Jay, are Jewish.

On what does Mr. Lappin base his charge of racism? A collection of quotes pulled from comments from old diaries from the site. What he is suggesting is that these comments – made in some cases years ago, mean that YearlyKos was full of anti-Semites.

Here’s one Mr. Lappin used:

“Once we lock up a Majority, where we don’t need Lieberman, I hope they will kick him to the curb like the dog he is.”

Not the politest post I have ever seen, but I fail to see anything anti-Semitic in this.

Some of the other quotes that Mr. Lappin noted were, actually, inappropriate. However, as Mr. Lappin gleefully claims:

Many times posts are left up for weeks or months until watchdog groups raise concerns over anti-Semitism–at that point, Kos removes the blog pages.  Fortunately, there are other savvy bloggers out there who keep archived copies.

Damm right. If anything is posted that’s wrong, it gets pulled. That’s the right thing to do.

So why would one of Congressman Mark Kirk’s largest supporters attack especially Jay Footlik on the issue of his faith and Israel?

Simply politics as usual. Kirk’s, and soon Jay’s, district is 18% Jewish and for all practical purposes on Election Day, the number is closer to 23%.

If Mark Kirk can’t run on his support for Israel, what can he run on? His continued support for the war in Iraq? His rubber stamp votes to support George Bush?

Ah, now you see the problem.

It’s far easier to paint me, and you, and everyone else at YearlyKos as an anti-Semite. It’s far easier to wave the flag of racism. It’s disgusting.

Mr. Lappin:

Don’t call me, and my friends, and my fellow bloggers and attendees at YearlyKos anti-Semitic ever again.

Because I will sue you for defamation and libel.

Are we clear?

Footlik Response

ArchPundit August 7, 2007 3 Comments

Once again, Mark Kirk has shown he has nothing to offer the people of Illinois’ 10th district other than more of George Bush and Karl Rove’s ugly politics of smear and fear – and why we desperately need a change in Washington.

I call on Mark Kirk to denounce these types of divisive and dishonest attacks.

Response II

ArchPundit August 7, 2007 1 Comment

Andy Lappin did the typical smear job we’ve come to expect from the right in the e-mail that you received from M Feiger. The Daily Kos is a blog and like any blog there will be posts that are distasteful because in this country we have the freedom to express our views, even views that we might not share or like. It is true that some people who post on the Daily Kos do not like Joe Lieberman but Andy Lappin took those comments out of context. The primary reason the Daily Kos bloggers don’t like Senator Lieberman is not because of anti-semitism but for the same reason I don’t like him– he has been a lapdog to President Bush and has been supporting the immoral  and incompetent war in Iraq– a war Mr. Kirk has been supporting all along as well. Yes, there have been some inappropriate and racist remarks about Mr. Lieberman but by and large the negative remarks about the Senator are because of his unwavering support for our incompetent and dangerous President.

Thank you for your time.

BillO Talking Points from Kirk Supporters

ArchPundit August 7, 2007 No Comments

Dear Friends,

While we may disagree on politics and policy sometimes, we all can
agree to strongly condemn anti-Semitism, anti-Zionism and the
institutions that foment them.

I remain a stauch supporter of Congressman Mark Kirk who has co-
chaired the Congressional Task Force on Anti-Semitism, led the way on
hate crimes legislation, continues to lead on opening the Holocaust
archives in Bad Arolsen and remains the strongest voice in Congress
for the U.S.-Israel strategic relationship.

I write to you today to make sure you know about an issue I find to be
pivotal in the upcoming race for Congress in the 10th District.  While
the two Democrats vying to take on our friend Congressman Kirk next
year claim to support our values, their actions to gain political
support suggest they do not.

In an effort to appeal to their party's far-left, both candidates
participated in this week's Kos Convention in Chicago--with Jay
Footlik working the crowd and Dan Seals addressing the conference.
Both expressed great pride and satisfaction in attending.

What's troubling is that Seals and Footlik speak to our community with
one mouth and then run to a convention filled with anti-Semitic
bloggers.  DailyKos is a community of bloggers--thousands of people
who write their own opinions online.  The site's real attraction comes
from the discussion that ensues.

Let's see a few examples of what the Kos Convention attendees are
blogging--the very same people Seals and Footlik come running to for
support.  Many times posts are left up for weeks or months until
watchdog groups raise concerns over anti-Semitism--at that point, Kos
removes the blog pages.  Fortunately, there are other savvy bloggers
out there who keep archived copies.

1) "Once we lock up a Majority, where we don't need Lieberman, I hope
they will kick him to the curb like the dog he is."  This post
received 24 positive ratings and zero negative.
"He's [Lieberman] a much lower form of life than a dog"  8 plus/
zero minus
"He's a snake in the grass." 4 plus/zero minus
"Don't insult dogs like that, Given a choice between my dog and
Lieberman, I'd gas him without thinking twice." 4 plus/3 minus

http://www.netscape.com/viewstory/2007/05/16/daily-kos-gas-jew-lieberman-like-a-dog/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fnetwmd.com%2Fblog%2F2007%2F05%2F16%2F1682&frame=true

2)  "because as everybody knows, jews ONLY care about the welfare of
other jews"
http://www.dailykos.com/comments/2005/12/7/162152/209/100

3) "Israel is showing the entire world why the Iranian President was
absolutely right to suggest that Israel cease being a sovereign state
as is."
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=21553&only

4) "Zionism was and remains a racist ideology."  A picture was
included in that post showing an Israeli cabinet minister merging
faces with Adolf Hitler, with a Star of David inside a skull.
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=25034_The_Protocols_of_the_Daily_Kos&only

5) Another blog expressed sympathy and support for the Hamas takeover
of Gaza.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/6/15/153353/694

 Read More

Concerned Kirk, Not so Concerned About Equal Pay

ArchPundit August 1, 2007 No Comments

Kirk votes against the act to essentially let employees sue later than 180 days after the differential starts–IOW, an employee might not know they are being paid less, but they have to sue within 6 months.  Seriously. Mr. Concerned moderated joined up with the GOP on this bill to end the ability of women to seek compensation when their employer breaks the law.  Concerned indeed.
Seals statement on the vote:

Seals Supports Ledbetter Fair Pay Act
Kirk Sides with Republicans against the Legislation

Wilmette- The United States House of Representatives passed the Ledbetter Fair Pay Act
yesterday 225-199, which reverses a Supreme Court decision limiting the time that
workers have to sue their employers for pay discrimination. The legislation, which
Representative Mark Kirk voted against, would allow employees to sue within 180 days
of their last affected paychecks.
Dan Seals stated, “It is bad enough that the Supreme Court has made it harder for women
to receive equal pay.  But when Mark Kirk and his allies tried to keep it that way, they
added insult to injury.  This needed to be fixed.”

The following is an Op Ed by Lilly Ledbetter which appeared in the Christian
Science Monitor on July 31, 2007

Equal work, unequal pay
By Lilly Ledbetter

Jacksonville, Ala. – Imagine you’ve worked for a company for 20 years. You’re a good
performer. But unbeknownst to you, the company puts workers over 50 on a lower salary
track. At 60, you learn that for the past 10 years, you have been earning less – tens of
thousands of dollars less – than colleagues doing exactly the same work.

Think you have grounds for a suit? Think again.

The Supreme Court on May 29 ruled 5-4 in Ledbetter (that’s me) v. Goodyear Tire &
Rubber Co. that workers don’t have the right to sue for pay discrimination if they don’t
file a claim within 180 days after the decision is made to pay them less.

Now Congress has the opportunity to redress this injustice. The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay
Act will right this wrong. And it will have a profound impact on the working lives, and
livelihoods, of Americans across the country.

This effort to bolster workers’ right began in 1998 when I filed a sex discrimination suit
with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. I did so because I discovered that
the Goodyear plant in Gadsen, Ala., had been paying me significantly less than it paid my
male counterparts.

My salary started out comparable to the male supervisors, but over the years,
unbeknownst to me, my raises were always smaller. Eventually, I learned I was earning
$3,727 a month while the lowest paid of my male colleagues got $4,286 – for doing the
same job.

An Alabama jury awarded me more than $3 million after finding that Goodyear had
violated my rights under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. But a federal trial
judge cut that award to $360,000, then an appellate court reversed the jury’s decision and
so I didn’t even get the $360,000.

Then, in the strangest cut of all, the Supreme Court narrowly interpreted Title VII,
completely out of line with legal precedent and sided with Goodyear, arguing that I had
filed the complaint too late since Title VII requires employees to file within 180 days of
“the alleged unlawful employment practice.”

The majority ruling apparently ignored the fact that Goodyear was still underpaying me
when I filed the suit. Instead, calculating the time based on the date I received the first
discriminatory paycheck, years in the past, it ruled that I had missed the deadline for
redress.

In her dissent, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg, the Supreme Court’s only woman, took the
unusual step of reading her opinion aloud. She noted that the original jury heard
testimony that a supervisor who evaluated me in 1997 – an evaluation that led to denyin
me a pay raise – was “openly biased against women.” She wrote: “Toward the end of he
career … the plant manager told Ledbetter that the “plant did not need women, that
[women] didn’t help it, [and] caused problems.”

Substitute any category of work-er for “women” – seniors, Latinos, gays, disabled,
Muslims, etc. – and you can see the impact that results from the court gutting this key
civil rights protection.

While workers’ and civil rights groups are lauding the Ledbetter Act, the bill has met
opposition from the pro-business lobby. Neal Mellon from the US Chamber of
Commerce said that many business owners didn’t want to open themselves up to the
liability of employees filing suits “decades later.” My story shows that filing these suits
decades after the initial discriminatory paycheck is often unavoidable. Each paycheck I
received was an act of discrimination, regardless of the amount of time that passed.

How many workers know what their colleagues make? Do you? I certainly didn’t until
years after the fact. Indeed, one-third of private sector employers bar employees from
discussing their wages with co-workers.
Unless Congress rights this wrong, employers can legally get away with discrimination
so long as they can make it to day 181.

• Lilly Ledbetter, a volunteer and mother of two, has been married for 51 years.

Schock Voted Against Electric Rate Relief Bill

ArchPundit July 26, 2007 No Comments

That’s some shitty timing for him.