question is, did butterfield

contribute to jackson when he was running in the primary?

then maybe you could infer some sort of personal or political affinity... which doesn't expunge him, he should still be working to elect the democrats that are on the ballot as democrats, but...

if he's only giving up money as an afterthought when the guy's running against a democrat... that's something more sinister.

It is difficult to get the news from poems, but men die miserably every day for lack of what is found there. --William Carlos Williams

---

by: RichardPlatypus @ Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 13:27:05 PM UTC

You must have skimmed past it. :-D

That sort of thing is messed up, but it's not as messed up as this contribution that Jackson collected on July 26th. Yes, you read that correctly: Democratic Congressman G.K. Butterfield (NC-01) sent Jackson a $500 check from his campaign committee two weeks after he entered the race as an independent.

---

by: JeremiahTheMessiah @ Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 14:45:26 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

whoops

i wasn't clear - meant to wonder whether butterfield initially contributed to jackson in the primary (in addition to the $500 in july). it's a small distinction, but maybe the two are friendly and he felt he owed him. but if he didn't contribute to him when he was a legitimate democratic contender, only AFTER the fact of his perfidy - then there's no potential explanation

It is difficult to get the news from poems, but men die miserably every day for lack of what is found there. --William Carlos Williams

---

by: RichardPlatypus @ Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 20:21:20 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Crap like this just pisses me off -- and I'm in a pretty laid back mood this morning

As the above comment noted, if there is some individual or family connection, that doesn't excuse this but perhaps explains it.  But, my guess is that's not the case.  If this is a case of someone wanting to support another black candidate for the sake of supporting a black candidate, this is no different than Nikki Tinker without the racist venom.  It's potentially worse, as unlike the Memphis seat, we could very well lose this one because of crap like this.

I think this indirectly brings up a larger issue that has been discussed off and on here over the campaign -- progressive support for Blue Dog Democrats in conservative districts.  Like most (but certainly not all) of the regular posters here, I squarely put myself in the liberal wing of the party.  But I have absolutely no problem supporting more conservative Democrats in seats where they are good matches for their districts.  Don Cazayoux certainly fits that qualification for me.  So does Travis Childrers.  So does Gene Taylor (who should be up for canonization for his work on Katrina recovery).

Where do I draw the line?  On so-called Democrats who go out of their way to stick it to the party.  Obvious candidates are Joe Lieberman (who I think is operating out of a genuine but misguided sense of what he thinks is right), and Zell Miller (who I think just wants attention).  I also have no problem ousting crooks like Bill Jefferson, or supporting progressive challenges in progressive districts (like Donna Edwards -- she's going to be a great Congresswoman).  That's very, very different from someone who is going to have a more conservative voting record, especially on military and social issues, than the rest of the party.  Consider Representative Cazayoux.  He could have very easily pulled a Rodney Alexander or John Kennedy, moved to the right, glossed over a few past positions, and ran as a Republican.  He didn't.  In a Republican-leaning district, he stood up as a Democrat and won.  Same thing with Representative Taylor.  I'm sure he's faced pressure (or at least had the opportunity) to switch parties during the long span the GOP controlled Congress.  He didn't.

I understand the opposing viewpoint that we're progressive people first, and especially on issues like gay rights and reproductive rights, we should not support people who oppose that vitally important agenda.  I myself am a Democrat because I'm on the left, not on the left because I'm a Democrat.  On those issues, I'll oppose the Blue Dogs as much as I will conservative Republicans.  But I've chosen to identify with and support a broad-based political party that needs 50%+1 of votes and seats in Congress to push forward any agenda.

Let's not be like the Republicans.  Look at the 2006 elections, and the candidates they put up in the open seats in southern Arizona, the Denver suburbs, upstate New York, and eastern Iowa.  All of those are swing districts that in a normal year could equally support Democrats or Republicans.  But the GOP chose candidates so far to the right of the majority of those districts, only in a Republican wave year would they have any shot at winning.  Increasingly, the folks that control the GOP seem to have a very, very narrow definition of what a "Good Republican" is, and they are increasingly paying the price for it.

OK, I've gone off topic a bit -- and now am ready for my next cup of morning coffee!!

---

by: IndianaProgressive @ Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 13:51:48 PM UTC

All I can say is

Hear, hear! What's more, this idea that there is some stark dividing line between "good" and "bad" Democrats is nonsense. Just check out what Travis Childers had to say yesterday:

I feel it is morally reprehensible that the middle class is not only suffering from a failing economy and rising costs but also now is being asked to foot the bill for Wall Street's bad decisions and reckless management as a result of deregulation," Childers said.

You won't hear this kind of talk coming from some of our supposedly more progressive "New Dems."

---

by: DavidNYC @ Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 14:53:50 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Also

Difference between conservative Dems and Repubs on "social" issues?  They might agree on the issues, but only the Repubs will repeatedly bring it to the table and make a big deal of it (often for election purposes only, heh).  When you ask the Democrat, he/she will answer with their position, but that's about where it ends; they know that they're in Congress to solve the real problems, such as economic issues, not to fan flames merely for electoral gain.

party: Democratic, ideology: moderate, district: CT-01

---

by: Glenn Magus Harvey @ Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 17:09:33 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

So what's NC-01 like?

It seems to be a D+9 district.  Is it safe to primary this guy?  Seems like it might be; he won unopposed two years ago.

party: Democratic, ideology: moderate, district: CT-01

---

by: Glenn Magus Harvey @ Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 17:10:38 PM UTC

I think it's a majority AA district too

So it shouldn't be hard to find a good AA primary challenger to beat Butterfield.

---

by: ChadInFL @ Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 17:15:54 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

He doesn't look it, but I believe he is an African American.

This got discussed a month or two ago somewhere on here.  

---

by: JeremiahTheMessiah @ Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 17:47:02 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

He is black

His father was a long-time and pioneering activist/politician in eastern NC, and the Congressman has long been involved with civil rights issues.  He seems to have a pretty average center/left voting record, being  especially progressive on health care and labor issues (at least that's what I gather from ProgressivePunch).  That's why I wonder why he's doing this, and if it's a misguided notion to support another candidate just because he's black.

---

by: IndianaProgressive @ Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 18:05:58 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Well I'll be.

I would've never figured that from looking at his picture.

---

by: BruinKid @ Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 19:33:16 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I'm not advocating that.

I just think that someone in the Dem House leadership should smack some sense into him.

---

by: James L. @ Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 17:21:28 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Agreed

I think that sometimes we jump too quickly to "Let's primary the SOB" over one thing we don't like.  Smacking some sense into him sounds good -- or how about pulling any financial or other support he ever could expect to get from the party?  That said, I'm not saying it would be appropriate or inappropriate -- but it needs to come from the district itself.  It seems like we could do better, but that's not my decision to make.  During the 1990s, it was represented by Eva Clayton, who was absolutely fantastic.  She served for a decade and retired, and I believe works for the United Nations now.  The guy who took over for her, whose name escapes me now, was a smarmy crook who went to jail for stealing money from a charity.

---

by: IndianaProgressive @ Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 17:29:47 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I'm not saying that we should primary him

I'm just talking about primarying him in order to get a point across, that this was a bad idea.

Then again, though, maybe I should have been more forgiving.  Maybe he knows MJ as a personal acquaintance, and MJ begged him for a bit of money, so he sent across a piddly $500 even if he didn't really want to.  Or something like that.  $500 ain't all that much in the context of a six-figure bankroll for a substantial campaign.

party: Democratic, ideology: moderate, district: CT-01

---

by: Glenn Magus Harvey @ Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 18:35:25 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

No, it's not a lot of money

But, even if they were personal friends, they also are both veteran politicians and know how the game is played.  So I would say in that case, stay out of the whole thing!  No one is going to ask a relatively obscure Congressman from North Carolina his opinion on a race in Louisiana.

---

by: IndianaProgressive @ Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 18:42:54 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Veteran politician?

Well, if you include the time he served as an elected judge, sure.  But usually we don't think of judges as "politicians".  Of note, Butterfield only entered Congress in 2004, and had never been a state legislator, not even a city councilman.

This may be a much ado about nothing, but it would be nice to get a statement from Butterfield about why he made the donation.

---

by: BruinKid @ Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 19:30:24 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Frank Ballance

Frank Ballance is still in jail, it seems.  Resigned from Congress for "health reasons" three months before being indicted.

---

by: BruinKid @ Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 19:31:37 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

son too

I think his son is in jail too.  Or was.  Very bad affair all around.

"Keep the Faith"

---

by: blue south @ Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 19:38:55 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Its safe, and he is safe

Its a safe district, but he is safe.

He just spent most of early 2008 campaigning across the entire district for Obama and being his top surrogate in the state for a while.  He endorsed Edwards in the start of 07, but switched in January.

"Keep the Faith"

---

by: blue south @ Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 19:37:44 PM UTC

[ Parent ]