House speaker, Nancy Pelosi may be in the campaign battle of her life, in the primary election she is in on June 3.
Pelosi's opponent, Shirley Golub, says Pelosi has never had an opponent since she won her first race for congress 20 years ago.
But Golub has been pulling the top spot for weeks at ACTBLUE.COM, where bloggers supporting Democrats go to give campaign contributions. According to one source Golub is a lesbian who came "out" after divorcing her former husband.
Golub says she's received some spotty local media coverage, but just about no national coverage, even though the campaign involves the seat of the woman who is two heartbeats away from the presidency.
Shirley Golub is a former speech and language therapist, a realtor and entrepreneur who reports she got disgusted with Pelosi not ending the war or putting impeachment back on the table.
She's running to win in Pelosi's very liberal San Francisco district and with limited resources and what she estimates at less than one tenth the funding Pelosi has (Pelosi has been reported to be the House's top fundraiser) Golub says shes been getting a great response. "Some people bring up the point that she's speaker of the house, but I ask them what she's done for them. Nothing." BUt most people, she reports, agree with her that Pelosi has failed to stop the war, Pelosi has continued to fund the war and has kept impeachment of criminals Bush and Cheney off the table.
On actblue.com, Golub has raised just under $116,000, contributed by 2649 donors, while Pelosi has raised just under $5000, from 5 donors. But that's just money from the blogosphere. Golub says this has been the main source of her funding. FeCwatch.org reports that Pelosi has raised over $2 million for the 2008 race.
Using money raised as a criteria, as the mainstream media tend to do, Golub is no threat at all to Pelosi. But Golub reports she has a campaign team that has been hitting the streets and neighborhoods of San Francisco in California's district 8 and Golub has also taken some highly unusual approaches to get her word out. She's funded a play based on impeachment, that almost sold out the 500 seat theater it is running in.
And she's run an ad on Comcast-- an ad that Comcast first refused to run. After over 6000 people contacted contact, according to one Golub supporter, the giant cable company caved in and ran the ad, which featured a rubber chicken. Furthering the chicken angle of her opposition to Pelosi, Golub sent one of her volunteers to wear a chicken costume on the steps of the Capitol in Washington D.C., explaining, "What I am hoping to accomplish with this is to demonstrate just how truly useless it is to send a chicken to Congress."
Golub's press release for the Chicken on the Capitol Steps event stated,
Golub concludes, "The people of San Francisco have a real choice on June 3. This is a two-person race for the Democratic nomination. By coming out to vote for me, we can have immediate policy change in Congress, and put our representatives on notice that any one of them can be removed for their cowardice at the next election. Pretending to represent the people and then taking impeachment off the table isn't just chicken, it's morally wrong. Of course, I wish no disrespect to our nation's poultry."
To date, the only high profile national coverage of Golub's candidacy and the race, which appears in google news, outside of press releases and blogs, have been articles in The Hill and OpEdNews.com, which featured an interview with her. Even local San Francisco daily newspapers do not show up in a google news search for articles on Golub.
The primary election will be held on Tuesday. It will be very strange if the primary campaign race for the House speaker's seat goes completely without any national or local mainstream media coverage. If Golub gets more than a tiny fraction of the vote, it should send a strong message to Pelosi that she's gone off track, in terms of meeting the needs and expectations of her constituents. But Golub insists, she's not in it to send a message. She's in the race to win.
Rob Kall is executive editor and publisher of OpEdNews.com, President of Futurehealth, Inc, inventor . He is also published regularly on the Huffingtonpost.com. He is a frequent Speaker on Politics, Impeachment, The art, science and power of story, heroes and the hero's journey, Positive Psychology, Stress, Biofeedback and a wide range of subjects. He is a campaign consultant specializing in tapping the power of stories for issue positioning, stump speeches and debates. He recently retired as organizer of several conferences, including StoryCon, the Summit Meeting on the Art, Science and Application of Story and The Winter Brain Meeting on neurofeedback, biofeedback, Optimal Functioning and Positive Psychology. See more of his articles here and, older ones, here.
To learn more about me and OpEdNews.com, check out this article.
and there are Rob's quotes, here.
To Watch me on youtube, having a lively conversation with John Conyers, Chair of the House Judiciary committee, click here Now, wouldn't you like to see me on the political news shows, representing progressives. If so, tell your favorite shows to bring me on and refer them to this youtube video
My radio show, The Rob Kall Show, runs 9-10 PM EST Wednesday evenings, on AM 1360, WNJC and is archived on www.whiterosesociety.org Or listen to it streaming, live at either www.wnjc1360.com or here.
A few declarations.
-While I'm registered as a Democrat, I consider myself to be a dynamic critic of the Democratic party, just as, well, not quite as much, but almost as much as I am a critic of republicans.
-My articles express my personal opinion, not the opinion of this website.
Cindy Sheehan will be running against Nancy Pelosi in November and Shirley Golub's election will be this Tuesday, in a primary challenge against Pelosi.
Cindy Sheehan's campaign challenges the two-party system by running Sheehan as an Independent.
As I see it, Golub's people have not mounted a credible enough challenge to force Pelosi to have to come to San Francisco to debate Golub.
But after all that Cindy Sheehan has done to wage peace throughout the world? She's got my support all the way.
This illustrates the problem with our electoral system and with the lack of good strategy among the forces trying to unseat Pelosi. With two candidates splitting the vote in opposition to her, Pelosi will no doubt win with ease.
by
PrMaine (10 articles, 8 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 329 comments)
on Saturday, May 31, 2008 at 6:58:21 AM
Golub is opposing Pelousi in the Democratic primary in Ca this Tuesday, while Cindy Sheehan is opposing Nancy P. in the General election in Nov. If Golub wins Tues. (unlikely, I think) then she will possibly face Sheehan in Nov.
If Pelousi wins Tues she will find a much more serious fight in Nov as many of us sitting on the fifty yard line now will support Cindy whole heartedly.
Time for Nancy Pelousi to go.
Put impeachment back on the table, institute special prosecutors and hearings, sign onto the International Criminal Conventions for starters.
Send our alleged criminal masters to the International Court for trial over crimes against humanity and war crimes.
Think about voting Green or Independent this year.
For Peace and Justice
Jack Harrington
by
Jack Harrington (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 307 comments)
on Sunday, June 1, 2008 at 11:11:09 AM
Reagan's task as a good capitalist was to systematically dismantle The New Deal, or what was left of it. He fired the more than 10,000 striking members of PATCO, about threequarters of the nation's air traffic controllers. Reagan's anti-worker policy began an era of pro-business antiunionism. The Reagan administration secretly sold arms to Iran, which was at war with Iraq, hoping to gain Iran's cooperation in freeing American hostages. The first of several mines in Nicaraguan harbors, planted by U.S. agents, was detonated. In a foreshadowing of the sub-prime loan crisis, the nation's "thrifts," as the Savings &Loans are called, were deregulated in the early 1980s to allow them to invest in commercial real estate and business. (De-regulation, by definition, means opening up the floodgates to lawlessness, in this case usury, among other things). However, the thrifts became unstable because many of their investments reflected the growth in the 1980s of highrisk "junk bonds," which were speculative or fraudulent.Capitalism always works in this manner. In 1987, the instability of these investments became apparent as stock prices plummeted and with them the solvency of the thrifts. The losses were great. Under Reagan's leadership, the nation turned away from its commitment to social welfare spending and undercut measures for translating civil rights laws into social practice. Dubbed "Reaganomics," this movement caused the federal government to disband the Office of Economic Opportunity (1971), weakened support for affirmative action in Bakke v. University of California Davis (1978), and enacted a vigorous policy of tax cuts with the Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981 and the Tax Reform Act of 1986. Under the Republican administrations, numerous groupslabor unions, women, racial and ethnic minorities, and environmentalists experienced the impact of increasingly conservative policies.Now, under Bush, capitalist "deregulation" has hit a dead end. It has caused all the damage it can, it has made all the billionaires it can. The only thing left is physical attacks on the American people themselves, that is, those who dare object. One of the antidotes to this kind of capitalist anarchy and lawlessness is to reverse "deregulation". That mean that industry has to be nationalized and run efficiently, without personal profit, but rather with the common good, being the driving force. The nationaliztion that has been going on in Venezuela is instructive. The state intervened directly in the productive process, through the takeover of unproductive companies and farms. New worker and peasant demands include ‘opening the books’ of the profitable firms and farms in pursuit of wage and collective bargaining negotiations, reopening closed firms and investments in new public enterprises. The government recognized that the problem of production (supply) will continue to lead to too many dollars chasing too few consumer goods – inflation, discontent and political vulnerability – unless it accelerates the nationalization process and deepens public ownership. To effectively intervene and take control of strategic economic sectors, the government requires working class organizations, cadre and leaders able to co-manage the enterprises, ‘opening the books’ on investments, profits and wages and establish work discipline. Under present capital-labor relations, capitalists totally neglect investment in technology and innovations, employ temporary or contingent workers under precarious conditions and depend on the Venezuelan state to enforce harsh labor codes. In advancing the Bolivarian road to Socialism, the government has to deal with incompetent and reactionary officials in its midst. For example, prior to the government’ nationalization of the major steel multinational SIDOR, the Minister of Labor, an incompetent and inexperienced functionary with no prior relation to labor, sided with the company and approved of the Governor of the state of Bolivar in calling out the National Guard to break the trike. Throughout 2007-2008, management of SIDOR refused to negotiate in good faith with the unions, which provoked strikes in January in February and March 2008. The intransigence of the steel bosses increased the militancy of the workers and led to the government’ intervention. In defense of his order to nationalize, the government cited the positive role of the steel workers in opposing the coup, the ‘slavelike’ work conditions and the export strategies, which denied the domestic construction industry the steel it needed for highpriority homebuilding. He called on the nationalized industry to be run under ‘workers councils’ in a efficient and productive manner. Government repression of strikes provoked regional union solidarity and workerled marches against the National Guard and calls for the resignation of the ineffective Labor Minister. After the government nationalized steel, trade unions from major industrial sectors met to coordinate support for President the government and press for further moves toward public ownership. In April 2008, President the government recognized that fundamental changes in the use and ownership of productive land is the only way to control the use of government credit, loans and investment to ensure that the funds actually go into raising food and not purchasing or investing in new luxury apartments or real estate complexes or buying foreign bonds. In March and April 2008, the government, with the backing of the major peasant movements and workers in the food processing industry, expropriated 27 plantations, a meat processing chain, a dairy producer and a major food distributor. Now the challenge is to ensure that competent managers are appointed and resourceful worker-peasant councils are elected to insure efficient operations, new investments and equitable rewards. What is abundantly clear is that President the government has recognized that capitalist ownership even with government subsidies is incompatible with meeting the consumer needs of the people.
After all, Bush said he wanted an ownership society.
by
Antonio (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 63 comments)
on Friday, May 30, 2008 at 4:15:12 PM
So even tho Golub means no disrespect to chickens (or the poultry industry), she shoulda picked an invertebrate to represent any of those Dems who continue to aid and abet this illegitimate administration.
funny article; thanks for posting it, Rob
by
Rady Ananda (109 articles, 262 quicklinks, 28 diaries, 875 comments)
on Friday, May 30, 2008 at 5:28:25 PM
I would vote for just about any liberal/Democratic over
Nancy (Impeachment is off the table) Pelosi, holding hands with Harry Reid...I have become increasingly disillushioned with the Democratic "limp washcloth" approach to justice and so-called sworn oath of office to protect the Constitution..and then wimping out and whimpering about how those mean old GOP obstructionists won't let them do any thing (BooHoo)...yuck...a bad taste in my mouth...I won't vote for GOP under any circumstances.... but yeah, throw out the incumbants and the Blue Dogs in the Democratic party....I'm okay with that...!
by
Susan Nelsen (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 268 comments)
on Friday, May 30, 2008 at 6:47:11 PM
Funny isn't cutting it. For Golub to make a serious run at the seat she needs more than just a one issue position. I sent her money, but I hoped she had more than just one funny ad to use against Pelosi. It takes lots and lots of supporters to make a dent in fund raising and clearly Golub has not gotten the support she needs from the internet or from readers of this OpEd site. Will Cindy Sheehan? I just don't know. It seems she might be able to use more help too if all she has is her anti-war stance.
I see the problem with our Congress typified by Pelosi.
1. Young Congress people come in and are indoctrinated into a party system more concerned with "Control" and "Power" rather than getting things done and making government work better.
2. Money is power, so those with money get listened to intently. Earmarks are put in bills to secure future support. Earmarks accounted for $63 billion of the budget last year.
3. Influence goes hand-in-hand with "Power" so special interests with influence are also listened to in place of the people Congression Representatives are suppose to represent. This is particularly true at the Administration level. This is why we saw "no bid contracts"; "hands off business attitudes of regulators"; "Energy Policy written by the Energy Lobby".
4. This whole house of cards falls down unless you can keep the Party members in Congress doing what you want, what you tell them to do. Republicans did this very well and never asked any serious questions of what Bush/Cheney did. Democrats seem equally happy to do the same with Pelosi and Harry Reid. They are all culpable to a system designed to reward "loyalty" instead of designed to reward "integrity". Unless we do more to change this, we are looking at a change in the guard in Washington this fall, not a real change in the game.
There is far too much loyalty (predicated on money and support for re-election) and far too little integrity where Congressional Representatives actually listen to the public and vote in the public's interest (which is the purpose of a REPRESENTATIVE). The whole Washington system is ineffective because the influence and interests being represented in WASHINGTON are not the people, but those with the most influence and money. Until the internet becomes the one with the most influence (in terms of its effects on voting and raising money) it will not change current policy. Nothing will change until special interests and resources can be displaced by at least an equally powerful force -- the people's.
We need to generate more money to unseat people who do not represent the interests of the people. We need to provide ideas and input to help newcomers dethrown elected officials more interested in their own "careers" than in "public service". We need to force elected officials to stop and quit listening to money and influence in WASHINGTON and start listening to the PEOPLE they are suppose to be representing and who elect them to office every 2 or 6 years.
Perhaps a trial effort could be undertaken through OpEd. One or two Elected Officials could be identified who support lots of special interests at the expense of the people they serve. Fund raising for a "QUALIFIED" opposition candidate who reflects the interests of the people in that Congressional District could be carried out and campaign help provided that person with respect to local issues of relevance, representation of their needs in Congress and pledge to make government work more efficiently and effectively. The candidate would not be obligated to "reward" fundraisers by doing anything other than being committed to making Government work better and more effectively. No earmarks. No jobs. No anything for this help. Just a commitment to make Government work better and to listen to the people in that Congressional Region and Represent them in Congress.
This would mark the beginning of the end for Party Politics. The Congressional person would no longer be beholding to the party and they could lose future support and help if they failed to live up to their promise to work for the people and make government work better. Their record on what they supported or did not support would be fairly evaluated. No one agrees 100% on everything, but one should see a shift away from special interest to people and US interests. One should see a far greater committment to ACCOUNTABILITY IN GOVERNMENT. One should see a Congressionl person responding to constituent's letters instead of ignoring them. One should see a Congressional Representative talking, listening and trying to improve how effectively Government works. Wouldn't that be a change for once.
by
Peter Wedlund (3 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 164 comments)
on Saturday, May 31, 2008 at 8:31:09 AM
8 comments
How would you rate this?
You must be logged in (if signed up) to do ratings.
It's free to signup! And easy. And takes just a minute or two....
Must Read (
Well Said (
News (
Touching (
Funny (
Supported (
Interesting (
Inspiring (
Valuable (
