Month: October 2010

One of the biggest stories of the year is being virtually ignored by one of the most influential media outlets in America.  Meanwhile, Iran’s government news outlet engages in journalism.

Cross posted from Pruning Shears.

No Associated Press content was harmed in the writing of this post

The latest document dump from WikiLeaks would seem to be one of those massive, stop the presses, drop everything and throw all available resources at it stories that dominates news cycles for weeks on end.  One of the first revelations was of Frago 242 (a Guardian story describes a frago as “a ‘fragmentary order’ which summarises a complex requirement”), which directed soldiers not to investigate war crimes that did not directly involve members of the coalition.  There are reports that US soldiers may have engaged in war crimes themselves.  There are hundreds of thousands of documents and they will take a long time to digest.

The New York Times featured it Saturday.  On Sunday it did so again; this time with an accompanying character assassination of Julian Assange, which Glenn Greenwald promptly took apart.  While Greenwald focuses on the author of the smear – London Bureau Chief John Burns – in a sense it is a somewhat narrow critique.

It seems similar to how some activists focused their ire on Rahm Emanuel when initiatives appeared to get frustrated by the White House.  After all, the hard charging, abrasive chief of staff who draws fire (conveniently) away from the president is a stock character in Washington.  Emanuel was hardly novel.  More importantly, he was not calling the shots.  Anyone put off by him should focus at least as much on his employer.

The same goes for Burns.  Whatever journalistic sins and malfeasance can be hung on him (and Greenwald catalogs them brilliantly) the fact is, his employers give him the platform.  We should spare some scrutiny for them.  For instance, look at the front pages of the Times on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday.  There is nothing about the new documents at all.

One of the reasons Watergate became huge was because there was a drip, drip, drip of revelations splashed on the front page over an extended period of time.  It kept the issue before the public, allowed it to get knowledgeable and engaged, and gave the story enough momentum to survive the hostile reaction of the political establishment.

Obviously there are differences with WikiLeaks, the most salient of which may be professional jealousy.  Media outlets love to get the scoop and hate being scooped.  The Washington Post had its own reporters digging away at Watergate, so it reflected well on the paper to have their work played up.  Times editors may not be as fired up about trumpeting someone else’s revelations.

Still, it takes some kid of extraordinary lapse in editorial judgment to allow such a phenomenally important story to be given such short shrift.  Iran’s state media outlet, PressTV, has shown how to cover a story like this without letting institutional vanity get in the way.

It has simply assigned people (identified only by initials – apparently no one gets the star treatment there) to go through the documents and write up what they find.  And what they are finding is jaw dropping: assassination, torture, a variety of abuse (some of it stunning), rape, the list goes on.  It is news – relevant, compelling news because it paints a far grimmer picture of what is happening there than the government has been willing to acknowledge.  The Times fancies itself the newspaper of record; if its editors believe that, why can’t they swallow their pride, have a couple reporters roll up their sleeves and dig in?

Even if it is considered common drudgery (though it is also the sort of thing newsrooms used to romanticize as shoe leather reporting) why not try to connect some dots?  See what implications there for what we already know, or how it might change what had previously been reported.  That kind of deep analytic work is ideally suited for a company with deep resources and archives.  The Times could advance the story and put their imprint on it.

For whatever reason, they have decided not to pursue it.  The front page scans above give a reasonably good picture of what they currently consider most newsworthy, and there is a gigantic hole right in the middle.  Since they also help set the tone for American news coverage, a horrible deficiency like this does not exist in a vacuum.

Happily, we live in an era when news sources from around the world are available.  It is now possible to consult faraway outlets, even those that are derided as government propaganda organs.  As in cases like this, sometimes they will be superior to American media.  Engaged citizens can usefully mix in a few minutes with a Press TV or an al Jazeera on a regular basis.  Perhaps they can improve their understanding of the world by catching up on the news that US outlets have concluded is not fit to print.

Hello again painting fans.

This week I will be continuing with the painting of the turreted Cape May house.  I’ll be using the photo seen directly below.

When last seen, the painting appeared as it does in the photo directly below.

Since that time, I have continued to work on the painting.

As you can see, I’ve decided to go with blue shadows.  The highlighted areas will be grays and whites.  Accordingly, I’ve added blue shadows to all the left-facing surfaces except for the house next door.  I’ve also added details to the porch and front steps.  There is much, much more to do.  I’ll finally start adding some opaque color for next week.

The current state of the painting is seen in the photo directly below.

   

That’s about it for now. Next week I’ll have more progress to show you. See you then. As always, feel free to add photos of your own work in the comments section below.

Earlier paintings in this series can be seen here.

While I don’t know that this is directed as me, I will respond to it anyway.

It’s been a bit of mystery to me why there’s this narrative about blogreading newsjunkies not being enthusiastic enough to vote. Those people vote. It’s somewhat disconnected people who might be a bit too worried about their lack of employment to head out to the polls that Dems should worry about…

This is a misreading of my narrative and the narrative that I think is important. The people who read the progressive blogosphere’s product are indeed political newsjunkies, and are going to vote in extremely high numbers. Some of them may vote for third-party candidates because they’ve been told over and over again that the Democrats suck, but the overwhelming majority of them will vote for the Democrats. The problem lies elsewhere. We’re not just preaching to the choir. We’re helping to set the narrative. No one on the right is going to defend the Democrats’ record. The corporate media isn’t going to defend it or even report it accurately. That’s why most of the country is completely wrong about whether their taxes have gone up or down, or whether or not we lost the money that Bush gave to the banks.

I understand that progressives want to advocate for progressive policies. But, in my opinion, we lost sight of the fact that there is literally no one else in the media who can or who will defend the Democrats if we won’t do it. What most of us did was the opposite. And, because our critiques were factual for the most part, and because we had no political incentive to lie, our critiques carried a lot of credibility with our own base and with the media at large. And, so, no one defended the health care bill, no one defended the stimulus, no one defended TARP, and no one defended the Wall Street reforms. Is it any wonder that people are misinformed about those programs and policies?

And I am not saying that people were wrong to advocate for better policies or that people should have STFU. I am saying that people need to think about what they are trying to accomplish. If you are trying to influence the administration or the Democrats in Congress to do something differently, I don’t see a problem. But if you are just tearing them down, day after day, focusing relentlessly on their shortcomings and consistently failing to highlight their accomplishments, then you are driving a narrative that is going to help keep people uninformed and hostile to progressive aims.

Anyone remotely objective acknowledges that this past Congress has the most progressive record of accomplishment of any Congress since the 1960’s. In fact, the mainstream media is more consistent about reporting this fact than the blogosphere. We certainly haven’t pushed that narrative on the corporate media. They’ve reported it because it’s inarguable. Yet, they haven’t reported it enough. They haven’t reported it in a way that it sunk into the thick skulls of an American public that is being saturated with bullshit.

And the last point is that all this concentration on the plank in our own eye has led to us letting our guard down about what we’re facing from the opposition. If you can name me one area where the current crop of Republicans will be better, let me know. Are they going to be better on refinancing mortgages? On civil rights and privacy? On gay rights? On foreign policy? On health care policy? On regulating Wall Street? On women’s rights? On immigration? On climate? On science? On campaign finance reform? On judges? On process?

So, my narrative is not about depressing the readers of the blogosphere so they won’t go out and vote. It’s about the lost opportunity, the misdirection of focus, the lack of perspective, and the failure to do the one job that only we can do.

You know, maybe it’s because I read all Dostoyovsky’s novels, but I don’t think the word ‘scoundrel’ gets thrown around enough in this country. I mean, Joe Miller is a scoundrel. That’s what he is. Rick Scott is a scoundrel, too.

If his bid to be Florida’s next governor is successful, Rick Scott could find himself in the awkward position of choosing his own inquisitor. New documents show that complaints into a chain of clinics he ran have been referred to the state health department, whose head is appointed by the governor.

Throughout the close race against Alex Sink, his Democratic opponent, Mr. Scott has stressed that he was never charged with wrongdoing when the health care conglomerate he built, Columbia/HCA, was fined with $1.7 billion for defrauding government health programs in 1997.

But Mr. Scott’s campaign has dismissed accusations about Solantic, a chain of health clinics he ran after his ouster from Columbia/HCA. Among them are allegations from a former employee that Solantic over-billed Medicare, Medicaid and a government health agency for veterans, as well prescribed unnecessary drugs for patients to buy through Solantic’s internal pharmacy.

Normally, the electorate has to decide whether to reelect someone who has done something highly unethical or criminal. Until this year, it was rare that a fresh challenger would come in with a well established record of ripping people off and breaking the rules. But we have that in spades right now. You have Christine O’Donnell using her campaign funds to pay her rent. Carl Paladino is a train wreck as a businessman and an ethics cement-head. Joe Miller’s hiding properties in fake trusts and breaking ethical codes at work. Marco Rubio ran up the GOP’s credit card buying wine and getting his family minivan serviced. Sharron Angle is an ethical disaster zone. Same for Linda McMahon:

Connecticut GOP Senate candidate Linda McMahon defended steroid use and acted-out wrestling violence against women during her tenure at the WWE…

…When asked if she was “creeped out” by an instance in which McMahon’s daughter walked into the ring as the crowd chanted “slut, slut, slut,” the Republican Senate candidate said, “You have to think about …the WWE as soap operas.”

“It was acting and WWE is the longest-running weekly episodic program in television. Sure, there are story lines that are better than others,” she said, adding that voters in Connecticut “are not concerned about soap opera story lines.”

These people are scoundrels. They are not reputable people. Nearly all of them are new to politics, at least on the federal level. It’s no wonder they don’t like the federal government. The federal government has an arm that enforces the law.

Why do terrorists always mess around at election time? First they mailed explosive devices all over the place (probably as a diversionary tactic) and now NORAD has escorted a U.A.E. passenger plane into JFK airport in New York.

NORAD is escorting a passenger flight from the United Arab Emirates to New York’s JFK airport “out of an abundance of caution,” a NORAD spokesman said.

Two Canadian CF-18s began to track a civilian aircraft that was “determined to be an aircraft of interest” as it flew over Canadian airspace, spokesman John Cornelio said.

Two US F-15s then picked up the escort to JFK, which is ongoing.

I’d rather be talking about Sharron Angle, Rand Paul, and Ken Buck.

Still, stopping acts of terrorism is preferable to standing on rubble with a bullhorn.

Cross-posted at WinningProgressive

With election day rapidly approaching, now is the perfect time to summarize exactly what is at stake on November 2.

When President Obama and the Democratic Congress took office in January 2009 after eight years of President Bush, our economy was in a free fall.  1.8 million jobs had been lost in the three months prior to President Obama’s inauguration, and a total of 3.5 million jobs had been lost in 2008.  Our financial system had melted down, and President Bush had provided Wall Street with a $700 billion bailout with virtually no oversight.  Median household income and net worth had declined, while the poverty rate and the number of uninsured had increased significantly.

President Obama and the Democratic Congress immediately began working to address these critical issues.  Democrats passed a stimulus bill that stabilized our economy and stemmed the astronomical job losses that occurred under the closing year of the Bush Administration.  As a result, in 2010, private sector jobs have increased every month.   Democrats enacted a Wall Street reform bill to regulate derivatives and avoid future bank bailouts, and reformed Bush’s Wall Street bailout in ways that have ensured that the banks have paid almost the entire amount back to the taxpayers.  Democrats tackled health insurance issues, by enacting reforms that will end abusive industry practices like pre-existing conditions denials, expand health insurance coverage to 32 million more Americans, close the Medicare donut hole, and begin to curb the rising cost of health care.  The Democrats also reformed student loans by shifting $65 billion away from subsidies for banks and toward increasing Pell Grants and other student aid, extended unemployment benefits and COBRA health insurance coverage to soften the blow of the Bush Recession, provided aid to small businesses, passed significant credit card industry reforms, created a Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to help ensure that Americans are no longer ripped off by the shady practices of payday lenders, credit card companies, and other financial institutions, and had a banner year on legislation to benefit veterans.   And Democrats did all of this in the face of virtually universal obstructionism from Republicans in Congress.

Much more, of course, remains to be done.  Creating jobs and lowering the unemployment rate is critical.  We need to pass comprehensive immigration reform that creates a path to earned citizenship.  We need to repeal DADT.  We need to address climate change and seize the economic opportunity provided by developing a clean energy economy.  We need to continue rebuilding our nation’s infrastructure.  We need to find sensible ways to address long term deficits, reduce the influence of corporate interests on our political system, and narrow the growing economic inequality in our system.

The question for November 2 is who do you trust more to address these major policy issues facing our nation?  On one side, we have Democrats who have worked hard to address the major issues of the day.  You might not always fully agree with the results or find them to be ideal, but at least with the Democrats we have been debating and focusing on how to make progress on issues that directly impact the lives of virtually every American.

On the other side are Republicans who have made clear that they care more about obstructionism, investigations, and repealing what progress has been made than about addressing policy issues in any serious manner.  For the past two years, Republicans have been the party of no, using the filibuster and other obstructive practices at an historically unprecedented rate.  Both wannabe House Speaker John Boehner and Mike Pence, Chairman of the House Republican Conference, have promised to continue this obstructionism by announcing that they will not compromise with Democrats over the next two years.   Meanwhile, wannabe Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has stated that the Republicans’ number one priority is to make sure that President Obama is a one-term President, rather than, say, helping the economy or creating jobs.  Meanwhile, if they were to gain a majority in the House, Republicans are promising a re-run of the investigations that they launched against President Clinton, when, for example, they took 140 hours of Congressional testimony on the Clintons’ use of the White House Christmas card list.

On policy, Republicans have offered little outside of tax cuts for the wealthy elite and threatening to repeal Wall Street reform and to shut down the government if they are unable to directly repeal health insurance reform.  Republicans make loud claims about wanting to cut the budget deficit, which was higher under the last year of President Bush than it is this year, but they refuse to offer any details about how they would do it.  The “Pledge” that the Republicans issued as their main policy document was widely dismissed as lacking details on numerous important issues, such as how to fix the economy or address Social Security and Medicare.  Some of their leading candidates, such as Sharron Angle in Nevada or Ron Johnson in Wisconsin, either claim that it would not be their job as a Senator to try to increase jobs, or are unwilling to offer even basic details about their policy positions until after the election.  And when the Republican candidates do talk policy, it is usually to try to disavow past statements that they want to privatize Social Security, Medicare, and the Veterans’ Administration, eliminate the minimum wage, and prohibit choice even in the cases of rape and incest.

So, the choice is clear.   At a time when our nation is faced with serious issues, Republicans are promising obstructionism, investigations, and little in the way of solutions.  By contrast, the Democrats, despite some disappointments, have a record of stopping our economic free fall and of enacting significant reforms in areas that directly benefit the lives of virtually every American, and will at least provide the opportunity for us to continue to work to improve our economy and to address the other major issues facing our nation.

If you want to help keep Congress Democratic, now is the time to act by:

1. Forwarding this blog post to any undecided voters or Democrats who are thinking about not voting that you know.

2. Canvassing for the Democratic Party. We’re doing it. Follow this link to find out how you can do it too.

3. Phonebanking for the Democratic Party. You can sometimes even do it from home. Click here to find out where and how to phonebank. An hour here or there can make a big difference.

4. Signing up to protect the vote from Republican voter suppression efforts on Election Day.

5. Getting offline once you have done the above. Turn off your TV. Even close your books, newspapers and magazines, and help Get Out The Vote!

Pollsters are almost entirely focused on the upcoming elections.  Many are predicting substantial victories for the GOP, and analyze what is driving or curbing the enthusiasm of the electorate.

Harvard Poll:  Millennial Generation’s Enthusiasm is Waning

Harvard conducted a poll of Millennials – individuals aged 18-29 – and find that election enthusiasm among this age group has declined since a year ago.  
    • 27% say they will definitely vote in November, compared to 36% in November 2009
    • The percentage who consider themselves politically engaged has dropped to 18%, from 24% 11 months ago
    • Millennials would prefer a Democrat-controlled Congress 53% to 42%

An survey analysis focusing on youth in the polls conducted by Pew analysis corroborates Harvard’s findings.

A recent Pew analysis of Millennials finds that the still strongly back Democrats, but fewer say they have given a lot of thought to this year’s election compared to registered voters 30 and over. 

    • 31% of registered voters under 30, compared to 53% of registered voters 30 and older, have given a lot of thought to the elections this year; this is a notable drop from 39% in 2006
    • 45% of Millennials, compared to 76% of the 30+ crowd, say they will definitely vote in the 2010 midterms; this is down slightly from 48% in 2006, but still higher than the 39% who asserted the same in the 2002 midterms

Democrats across the board are less engaged than in 2006, but the percentage of Democrat or Democratic-leaning Millennials that have given a lot of thought to the election has dropped substantially – from 47% in 2006 to 27% in 2010.  Millennials that identify as Republican or Republican-leaning, on the other hand, have seen a rise in engagement relating to the election, from 31% in 2006 to 39% in 2010.

Although a majority (56%) of Millennials identify with the Democratic party, the gap has narrowed for this demographic group – as it has in general – from 62% in 2008 to 56% in 2010.  The percentage of Millennials identifying with the Republican party has increased from 30% to 36% in the last two years.

Pew also finds that young voters tend to be more progressive than older generations on social issues, with higher approval rates for health care legislation and a broader government safety-net.  They also tend to be more optimistic about Obama’s economic policies, the direction of the economy, and the state of the country, despite the fact that they have experienced greater economic difficulties than other age groups (51% of 18-29 year olds report that they or someone in ther household has been without a job or has been looking for work in the last year, compared to 44% of 30-49 year olds, 40% of 50-64 year olds and 23 of those 65 and over).

Read more at The Opportunity Agenda website.

Join Wild Wild Left Radio every Friday at 6pm EDT, via BlogtalkRadio, to guide you through Current Events taken from a Wildly Left Prospective..

WWL Radio: Free Speech in Practice.

The call in number is 646-929-1264 to join the conversation!

Listen live here:

The live chat link will go live around 5:30.. found at the bottom of the show page, or by clicking the link below, to add to the discussion via chat.

CHAT LINK:
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/flashchat/chat.aspx?cohost=y&HostUserURL=dianeg

Miss the show? The podcasts are available at the link above, or at Wildwildleft.com.

Hear the Unreported & Under Reported Headline stories that are shunned by the mainstream, from Domestic Policy to International Politics by the WWL coalition of subversion: undermining the PTB by speaking Truth to Power!!!!

This weeks Topics:

Well, hell… by the Comedy Channel’s standards I am thoroughly insane. I think its time to open the windows and scream, “I’m mad as hell, and i’m NOT going to take it anymore.” I mean really? Lumping Anti-War Protesters in with TEABAGGERS?  Thats not Comedy, it is trying to subvert activism and turn it into slackerism.

Restore Sanity? My version of sanity includes raging against the Headlines this Week. No sane people would take this shit quietly.

BP & HALLIBURTON KNEW THE CEMENT WAS BAD PRIOR TO THE OIL SPILL IN THE GULF.

THE US IS TRYING A CANADIAN BOY THEY KEPT AT GITMO FOR 1/3 OF HIS LIFE, WHILE FUNDING OTHER CHILD SOLDIERS IN YEMEN.

A SMALL FEMALE PEACE PROTESTER GETS HELD DOWN AND STOMPED BY TWO HUGE MALE TEA BAGGERS AND THEY ARE DECIDING (!!?wtf?!!) WHETHER OR NOT TO PRESS CHARGES.

ARIZONA’S RACIST IMMIGRATION LAW WAS THE BRAINCHILD OF PRIVATE PROFITEERING PRISON COMPANIES.

WIKILEAKS IS BEING TARGETED AS AN ENEMY FOR BEING A WHISTLEBLOWER, AND NO ONE IS REPORTING/CONDEMNING THE ACTUAL ATROCITIES DONE IN OUR NAMES.(& we remain skeptical whether this is an “approved” leak or not)

Call me insane. I think louder yelling is EXACTLY what is called for here.

Please join us for the only “out there where the buses don’t run” LEFT perspective with interviews, op/eds and straight talk without the hand-wringing PC that has crippled our movement!

Controversy? We face it. Cutting Edge? We step over it. Revolutions start with information, and The Wild Wild Left Radio brings you the best in information and op/eds from a position that others on the Left fear to tread…. all with a grain shaker of irreverent humor.

At times like these, it’s easy to get down on the American voter:

A plurality of Americans, though, perceive this Congress as having done less than usual. I’m not even sure how a political system is supposed to function with an electorate so far detached from reality.

I’m not sure that polling of people’s opinions on the issues even has any meaning. I mean, if there is one thing I am fairly confident about it’s that the Republicans made a winning argument that the government was doing too much. It’s not that people might not think Congress has done too little to get the economy moving, but they saw the government’s fingers in the auto industry, in the banking industry, in the health care industry, in the mortgage industry, in the insurance industry, and it seemed like a lot was going on.

As a purely factual matter, the present Congress has been more productive in terms of passing meaningful legislation than any since LBJ’s 1965-66 Congress passed Medicare, the Voting Rights Act, and a plethora of other landmark achievements. Here’s a list of the major bills passed by the 111th Congress.

Acts of the 111th United States Congress

January 29, 2009: Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009, Pub.L. 111-2
February 4, 2009: Children’s Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act, Pub.L. 111-3
February 17, 2009: American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, Pub.L. 111-5
March 11, 2009: Omnibus Appropriations Act of 2009, Pub.L. 111-8
March 30, 2009: Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009, Pub.L. 111-11
April 21, 2009: Edward M. Kennedy Serve America Act, Pub.L. 111-13
May 20, 2009: Helping Families Save Their Homes Act of 2009, Pub.L. 111-22
May 22, 2009: Weapon Systems Acquisition Reform Act of 2009, Pub.L. 111-23
May 22, 2009: Credit CARD Act of 2009, Pub.L. 111-24
June 22, 2009: Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act, as Division A of Pub.L. 111-31
June 24, 2009: Supplemental Appropriations Act of 2009, including the Car Allowance Rebate System (Cash for Clunkers) Pub.L. 111-32
October 28, 2009: National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010, including the Matthew Shepard Act, Pub.L. 111-84
November 6, 2009: Worker, Homeownership, and Business Assistance Act of 2009, Pub.L. 111-92
February 12, 2010: Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act, as Title I of Pub.L. 111-139
March 4, 2010: Travel Promotion Act of 2009, as Section 9 of Pub.L. 111-145
March 18, 2010: Hiring Incentives to Restore Employment Act, Pub.L. 111-147
March 23, 2010: Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Pub.L. 111-148
March 30, 2010: Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010, including the Student Aid and Fiscal Responsibility Act, Pub.L. 111-152
May 5, 2010: Caregivers and Veterans Omnibus Health Services Act of 2010, Pub.L. 111-163
July 1, 2010: Comprehensive Iran Sanctions, Accountability, and Divestment Act of 2010, Pub.L. 111-195
July 21, 2010: Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, Pub.L. 111-203
August 10, 2010: SPEECH Act of 2010, Pub.L. 111-223
October 7, 2010: Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010
October 8, 2010: Stem Cell Therapeutic and Research Reauthorization Act of 2010

If Congress had passed nothing more than the health care bill and the Wall Street reforms, this Congress would have been more significant than any since 1965-66. But they did a lot more than that. Perhaps the best piece of legislation was the Credit CARD Act. The public lands bill was very significant. The creation of a Consumer Financial Protection Agency was huge. Little noticed was the fact that the Dems finally got a patient bill of rights bill though, finally passed a hate crimes bill, and finally cut out the middle man on college loans. Veteran’s did extremely well in this Congress, which the American Legion readily recognizes.

Never mind that the president stopped the freefall of the economy, saved the auto industry, and secured subsidies for all those who can’t afford health insurance, he and this Congress have been extremely productive on other fronts. That the American people could tell pollsters that this Congress had done less than usual is not just bizarre. It doesn’t even make sense.

The New York Times is sniffing around Harry Reid’s political corpse, even though they really don’t have anything substantive to report. Naturally, both Dick Durbin and Chuck Schumer have been doling out cash and campaigning for senators in an effort to shore up support, should Reid lose his seat. And, indeed, things are looking bleak for the Majority Leader:

Positioned to pull off the biggest upset in the nation, GOP challenger Sharron Angle heads into Election Day leading Democratic incumbent Sen. Harry Reid by 4 percentage points, says a new poll for the Las Vegas Review-Journal and 8NewsNow.

The Mason-Dixon Polling & Research survey has Angle with 49 percent support compared with 45 percent for Reid in its first survey since the Tea Party favorite and the Senate majority leader held their only debate Oct. 14. The findings match two other post-debate polls in the race and show momentum for Angle, who two weeks ago edged out Reid, 47 percent to 45 percent, in the last Mason-Dixon survey.

I think it’s difficult to poll this race, considering the unpopularity of both candidates and the fact that Nevada allows people to vote for ‘None of the Above.’ It’s very difficult for me to imagine Sharron Angle in the U.S. Senate, but I guess I just have to stimulate my imagination. It looks like it could very well happen.

I’ve been really conflicted about who I’d rather see replace him as leader, between Durbin and Schumer. I like Durbin a lot more than Schumer. I consider Durbin a solid progressive, while Schumer is much more of a creature of Wall Street. But Schumer is probably the more aggressive of the two, and he’s very, very smart. I hope we don’t have to make a decision between the two of them because that would mean that Sharron Angle will be in the Senate for the next six years. But I would be excited to see new leadership. I just don’t know what new leadership would be better for the Democratic Party.

My heart is with Durbin. My head is conflicted.