So Who Am I?

There is still time to vote in my first and perhaps only poll. Am I truly a liberal, am I a moderate or conservative? Based upon the conversations so far, some liberals think I am Neville Chamberlain, an appeaser of the right, while the majority think I'm too liberal to invite to dinner. At this point, I am just interested in perception. Your opinion matters to me, because how one perceives oneself in usually far short of how others actually see you. I appreciate your feedback.

My First Poll- On Me

By Utah standards, I've usually considered myself quite liberal. However, I have liberal friends who think I am way to conservative on some issues. For example, I opposed the Iraq War, but favored the surge. I disagree with Obama's middle class tax cut because of it's effects on the deficit. Even so, I welcome a little insight into how I am perceived. Am I a liberal? moderate? conservative? or undefinable? I would appreciate your vote one way or another.

From Tragedy to Triumph

When I was very young, I remember this little blond girl who lived about a block away. She was the oldest of several little girls. I also remember when her mother tragically died a few days after giving birth to her last little girl. I remember well, just how much this tragedy affected her, being the oldest, and really being the only one old enough to understand the gravity of the loss. Her father remarried a woman who also had girls of similar age to the girls he had from his late wife. Katie, as I'll call her then faced the new challenge of trying to get along with new sisters. It didn't help that her new sister, her age, was beauty queen pretty, and was very popular.

Knowing the family well, I watched from a distance the struggles Katie went through, the feelings of inadequacy that would sometimes come to the surface. I always felt a great deal of empathy for her and her situation. Katie went on to marry, and raise a wonderful family. I remember running into her years later at a community event. She had organized the whole thing, and after talking to her, it dawned on me that she had done this before, many times. And she does it quietly, often with little or no recognition. And as I got to talk to her son, it was also apparent to me what a wonderful parent and role model she was.

I came away with a great deal of respect for Katie. She overcame alot of heart-ache as a child from the various tramas she endured, but came away strong, resourceful and committed to her family and community. As I temporarily part from politics, it is my memories of people like Katie that recharge my batteries. Thanks Katie.

Chardonnay Drinking Catholic

One person I have drawn inspiration from is a guy who will never be well-known for what he does on a daily basis. Lenny, is a guy who hangs out at a couple of watering holes. He loves to drink chilled chardonnay and hangs out with people he calls friends. What I admire about Lenny, is how unjudgmental he is, and how willing he is to put is arm around someone who has hit rock bottom. I've talked to people who were just short of sticking a gun in their throat, who came to Lenny's watering hole to garner the courage, who were intercepted by Lenny, and were reminded of their value as a human being by Lenny.

Lenny, has many faults, but he has an uncanny ability to understand where people are relative to their morale. When people are at their lowest, he lifts them up with encouraging words. The gal whose husband has left her, can count on Lenny hugging her and telling her how great it is to see such a wonderful looking young lady here at his watering hole.

People, when they've made serious mistakes in their lives and have faced public humiliation and legal problems, can count on Lenny to stand by them in their hour of need. This is a trait I deeply admire, though in IRL I would never admit it because he's a Cowboys fan. But he through his actions, reminds me of my responsibility to treat people as people, despite their faults.

Guys like Lenny are the kinds of people I need to remind me of who I am and what I'm about. The heartless and cold-hearted quest for political power you see from the McCain campaign is stark in it's relation to my bar-hopping, unjudmental friend. People, even those who have suffered mistakes or misfortune matter to Lenny. You read the comments of conservatives who willingly castigate everyone who may have fallen on KSL.com or Desnews.com, and you understand the soul of a conservative. I applaud my friend Lenny, who takes imperfect people and seeks to inspire in them hope, that they still might live honorable lives.

Lenny despite his many flaws is the kind of guy who inspires me to move on and fight the good fight against authoritarianism. Lenny sees value in the least of people. I just hope to be strong enough to follow his example.

Recharging My Personal Battery

As I mentioned in a previous post, I have tired of the highly charged, partisan political debates as of late. Though some would say, that I have contributed to the partisan debate, what I've seen during the last month and a half, is the descent of the Republican party into their typical Rovian smear campaigns that brought us eight years of a disasterous Bush legacy. What has disappointed me in the past, and continues to disappoint me today, is how effective such gross manipulations and dishonest propagandizing is to a seemingly cerebrum deficient electorate.

So, atleast till the Olympics is over, I'm going to focus on the positive. I'm drawing back from my memories of people who I knew at a local level who made a real difference and continue to do so. It is a reminder that there are good-hearted people out there who make a difference every day. People who overcome obstacles yet make a difference in ways that usually go unnoticed. The individuals I will highlight will be given an alias, so don't try to look these people up. But trust me, they are as real as the star that heats our planet.

But recognize, that in the end, this is selfish on my part. The purpose of this analysis is to be able to stand back, and regain some of the trust I have in the basic goodness of many Americans. I need to remind myself of the role models out there that go beyond rhetoric and follow their consciense and their hearts.

Tiring of Politics- I Need a Second Wind

As I've observed the blogosphere and the ramping up of the rhetoric, mostly from the Republican side, but also from the Democrats, my basic faith in humanity is on the wane. Conservative pundits and bloggers have their talking points, which they mindlessly and robotically shout in unison, and liberals get their talking points, which they post and in similar fashion.

Basically, this election is about whether the basic values of our Republic, and the rule of law, will be restored to some measure. The reckless lawlessness of the Bush administration has deeply undermined what generations of Americans fought for with their guns and with their words. Wrapping the evidence around a policy for war, perhaps the most egregious act of corruption, is added to torture, illegal eavesdropping, illegal signing statements, and a callous unwillingness to have open government, hiding behind "executive priviledge" like a criminal taking the fifth.

This election isn't about inflated tires, but about deflated values. And though I don't agree with Obama on everything (see my post on Obama's middles class tax cut), an additional four years of Bush/Cheney/McCain is not an acceptable alternative if we are to preserve the basic decent values our Republic stands for. Americans as a people need to be reminded of just how far we have sunk as a society in only 7.5 years of Bushian misrule. And McCain and his neo-Rovian strategies to gain power by any means shows that the Republican party has not changed and responded to the public they wish to govern. Power as an end, rather than a means to an end, and the misuse of that power to line the pockets of friends and donors is the legacy of the Bush administration. McCain's lack of criticism of this corruption shows just how much he has put away the maverik and replaced him with a lackey to the rich and powerful.

And so, if I recharge my jets during the coming weeks, I'll re-enter the fray with the same vitality I have as before. But I need a break. I need to go observe some people doing the right things for the right reasons to restore my confidence, not necessarily in the government, but in the people who vote in November. It is the people I'm concerned about and their preponderance for being easily led and manipulated by appeals to their worst instincts that concerns me. So if you don't see me post every day, it doesn't mean I don't care, it means I need to restore my confidence in those I care about.

Congratulations Are in Order to Fellow Blogger Urban Koda

Check out his blog at: http://kodathink.blogspot.com (I hope it is alright to post this Urban). Urban's wife gave birth to a little girl, Bronwyn Ntombi, on Tuesday, July 22 at 3:40 pm. I hope all is well for the Koda family.

Enlightenment Thinking and the Role of the Individual

Over at One Utah, Glenden Brown wrote a post on the influence of “the enlightenment” on the thinking of our nation’s founders and upon the establishment of a Democratic Republic which grants rights to the individual. Last night, I was listening to flute concertos by Carl Philip Emmanuel Bach (CPE Bach), an enlightenment composer and I contemplated the significant differences between his musical style and that of his illustrious father, Johann Sebastian Bach (JS Bach).

JS Bach is admittedly my favorite composer. His music has a lot of power, which is derived from a rational mix of structure, harmony and an amazing technical understanding of how notes relate to each other. JS Bach through his music, sought to glorify God, and to speak through the idiom of music, the power, knowledge, and mystery of an all-powerful and all-knowing God.

CPE Bach was greatly influenced by the music of his father, and borrowed from his father’s music liberally during his long career, first in Berlin and later in Hamburg. But what is interesting and striking, is the differences in the musical language and the differences in the goals of his music relative to his father’s. Like his father, CPE Bach wrote religious music. In fact, I would rank his “Die Auferstehung und himmelfahrt jesu” as probably one of the ten best oratorios of the 18th Century. But the portrayal of God is strikingly different from father to son. The mysterious and powerful God of JS Bach, is replaced by a God that is more human, and humane. The God of JS Bach is to be revered and feared. The God of CPE Bach is one you’d have a beer with. Much of this is the result of the enlightenment thinking that influenced CPE Bach in the intellectual circles he gravitated towards in Hamburg.

The musical language of CPE Bach sought to internally examine the soul of man. His language reflected the “empfindsamer Stil” or “sensitive style” and the focus of his music is human emotion and understanding. The role and value of the individual is central to CPE Bach’s music and is also the focus of enlightenment thinking. Enlightenment thinkers such as Rousseau, Locke, Hume, Hutcheson, Voltaire etal., placed value on being true to oneself and to the power of reason. This line of thinking is what inspired the likes of Jefferson, Madison, Paine, Franklin and others who helped found our nation. Instead of a nation where God had granted powers to the king, our nation was created with the notion that God had granted inalienable rights to the individual.

Individual liberty, enshrined in the secular, rational, thinking of enlightenment philosophy was a dramatic break from the past. It created an optimistic view of humanity that focused on human potential, not on human failings. It subordinated the government to the individual, not the individual to the government. And though you could argue that America was and continued to be a predominantly “Christian nation”, it was also a nation predominated by a Christianity in flux. The powerful medieval God was being replaced by a more personal God. And as Christians argue that man is created in the image of God, I would argue that man creates God in his own image. And as humanity became more rational and humane, so did the Christian God of the time.

And if you want to understand which direction we are going as a nation, we increasingly see a re-emergence of the medieval God that subordinated individual liberty to the whims of the state. The gains Americans made via the enlightenment are being rolled back. The question is whether the train is stoppable at this point. I’m hopeful that it is.

Are We To Be Governed by Laws? Or Men?

The recent FISA capitulation by the legislative branch represents just a glimpse into a wider arching problem that is confronting our U.S. Constitutional framework and how it has been subterfuged by the Bush Administration. I've had government officials tell me over and over again, "it's the law, if you want the law changed, go through the process to change it." We as citizens don't get to pick and choose which laws we obey. In theory, government officials in the executive branch don't get to pick and choose which laws they enforce. Admittedly, they often have to prioritize where to place their limited enforcement resources, but there should never be this presumption, that the law doesn't apply to them.

Enter the Bush Administration, the greatest challenge to Constitutional government we may have ever had as a republic. What is compelling and alarming, is the pattern of lawbreaking without accountability you see in the Bush II era. Violations of FISA surveillance laws is just the tip of the iceberg. Violations by the Bush Administration of torture laws, international treaties such as the Geneva Conventions, illegal detainments, and perhaps most interestingly, "signing statements" indicating which parts of legislation the executive deems worthy of imperial consideration. Bush has vetoed relatively few pieces of legislation. The reason, he has declared through "signing statements", that he alone gets to determine what is effectively, the law of the land.

The blatant and pervasive contempt for the rule of law, would have been harshly addressed just a generation ago. Republicans and Democrats would have for the most part discarded partisan divisions in order to preserve the rule of law. In today's partisan environment, Republicans in lock-step fashion block Democrats from preserving the rule of law, knowing that enough Democrats will be cowed by fear of enflaming the authoritarian conservative masses, to play with them.

This contempt for the rule of law is why I am not afraid to criticize Democrats when they empower those who would abuse the rule of law. Failure to do so, puts me on par with Republicans, who reject the rule of law when a Republican is in power, but use it as a blunt force weapon if a Democrat should hold office.

What it comes down to, is respect for the law. Our loyalties must be to the law, not to those who govern us and certainly not to their party offiliation or political philosophy. If we disagree with the law, we have recourse to change it. But when we shred the most basic fabric that holds a Constitutional society together, we are exposed to an amoral world, where power rules over principle, and we are vulnerable to those who would exercise power over us. The degree to which we have descended down an authoritarian path, is shocking. And when liberal bloggers such as myself are shrugged off as "extremist malcontents", I know for a fact, our Republic is in danger.

Sorry to preach.

Stunned I am- Unlawful Surveillance Made Lawful

I guess I should have seen the writing on the wall. Naively thinking that our Congress and Senate would fulfill their Constitutional role to act as a balance against an unchecked imperial presidency. In the Republican party, where are the Howard Baker's? Where are the Bill Cohen's? And among Democrats, why is it that that only 25 Democrats willing to stand up to the Bush Administration and defend our Constitutional values.

And whenever I hear our brave Utah Senators talk about defending the Constitution, we need to remind them that when it was hanging by a thread, they bore their scissors and cut away. And Obama showed a glimpse into who he really is, which is someone who covets power enough to compromise on principle.

Hatch and Bennett- Support the Rule of Law

Let's see some noise among the Republican bloggers who support the Fourth Amendment and believe in the rule of law. I already know both Hatch and Bennett, and my opinion generally does not matter to them. Perhaps it does to liberty loving Republicans.

Today, the vote for telecom amnesty goes before the United States Senate. Sen. Hatch and Bennett will show whether they blindly support a corrupt president who spied on Americans without oversight in violation of the law. And they will show that the rule of law means nothing to them, because we can just retro-actively legalize those who broke the law.

So to my Republican friends, I lay the challenge before you. If you support the FISA bill going before the Senate, justify and defend that support. If you oppose the bill, speak up to your Republican U.S. Senators Orrin Hatch and Robert Bennett. I'm counting on you.

Two Hundred and Thirty Years Later, Who are we?

As we celebrate Indepence Day, I ask the question, "who are we?" I am well aware of what we were. I have studiously studied history and my mentor J.D. Williams told me to embrace and appreciate the uniqueness that it is to be an "American." Our country was much influenced by enlightenment thinking from the 18th and 19th century. The wisdom of Rousseau, Locke, Hume, Hutchison, Voltaire and Klopstock enabled a colony subservient to monarchy to break free of this constraint and devise a system of government that was accountable to the people, but constrained by the Constitution. Individauls became important, with inalienable rights, not wardens of the state or Dukedom. Certainly, our founders feared rash actions, and wanted to suppress the pashions of public opinion. David Miller in his fine blog has done a wonderful job of analyzing the "federalist papers" and examining what our founders had in mind.

But life today, seems to be dominated by fear. The attacks on 9/11, created an environment where Americans gave unprecedented powers to the executive branch under the guise of protecting us. Many Americans, magnified the Al Qaeda victory over us on 9/11 by discarding the Constitutional provisions that provided for oversight of the Executive Branch. Republicans in lock-step, and Democrats fearing appearing soft on terrorism, surrendered without condition freedoms that many of us took for granted.

Let me put it plainly. Every liberty we surrender in our quest for better security is an appeasement to Al Qaeda. Every freedom we give up tells Al Qaeda, "uncle."

Listen, I am not willing to say uncle to a bunch of uber-religious morons like Al Qaeda. But the adminstration of George W. Bush has done nothing but emboldended the religious fanatics I despise. Bush is incompetent on many levels. But his handling on the war on terror will be used for generations regards a "not what to do" warning.

Admittedly, I supported the surge, and showed a certain confidence in Gen. Petraeus, Sec. of Defense Gates and others. Not because I supported the invasion of Iraq, which I didn't, but because we are actually there, and we now have a responsibility to the Iraqi people to give them a fighting chance to secure a better life. The positions I've taken are not popular with liberals or conservatives, but are based upon my own analysis.

BTW, I hope everyone enjoys the 4th of July and contemplates upon what is the best things that have made our Republic a remarkable experiment.

My Message Sent to Barack Obama

Barack:

I think Glenn Greenwald from Salon.com got it right when he wrote:

"A typical line in Barack Obama's stump speech throughout the primary season was that "the era of Scooter Libby justice . . . will finally be over." But this new FISA bill -- and the immunity it bequeaths -- is the very essence of "Lewis Libby justice": ensuring that our highest political officials and other well-connected elites can break our laws with total impunity. Courts keep ruling that the President and his allies have no excuses for having broken our laws, while our political establishment acts to ensure that they are protected from the consequences."

It's not too late to show the kind of leadership many of us thought we were going to get when we whole-heartedly supported your campaign. Please step up and not only oppose, but lead other Democrats in opposition to this evisceration of the Fourth Amendment.

Obi wan liberali's IRL Name

Matheson, Matheson, Matheson.....

Sorry for the Ferris Buehler reference.

Just an update- I still have not heard back from our "blue-belly" democratic congressman from the 2nd Congressional District. Neither he, nor one of his staffers has sought to contact me and explain his vote, despite two requests. I'm entertaining plausible explanations for the silence:

1- My e-mail came accross a little strong and therefore I hurt Jim's feelings and he and his staff felt such an e-mail is unworthy of a response from someone with the inherent uprightness of Jim Matheson.

2-Jim has no good explanation for his vote for telecom amnesty. However, he is told by his pollsters that giving his Republican candidate any ammunition at all on being "soft" on the Bush Administration's war on terror is a bad thing, so hopefully, he'll just go away and the issue will die.

3-Jim truly believes that the government should be able to spy on it's citizens without any oversight from the FISA court and that the Telecoms were doing their patriotic duty in fighting the war on terror. Above all, the fact that this liberal blogger is against telecom immunity, suggests he is not a real American and shouldn't be answered by his office, but referred to the FBI for further investigation.

4- Jim and his staff have been busy receiving campaign contributions from telecommunication company execs and will answer the e-mail as soon as he can catch his breath.

I'm betting on either 3 or 4.

Profiles of Cowardice- Yep, I'm still Pissed

Finally, we have Democratic leaders who will stand up to the Bush Administration's grasping for unfettered executive powers. NOT!!!!! Our first female Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi gave in without dinner, a movie or even a little hand-holding. And our brave and valiant Majority Leader, Steney Hoyer, certainly, this brave foot soldier from Maryland would defend our Constitutional values. Certainly, he has the testosterone to say to Bush and his cronies "Don't even think about it, bucko!." Well then again, maybe not.
Steney would have taken on the schoolyard bully, but hey, he was late for debate class and by giving in, he would look like someone who genuinely likes a peaceful schoolyard.

Certainly, Utah's lone brave Democratic Congressman, Jim Matheson, will have the intestinal fortitude to atleast yell at the bully and tell him "you've gone too far this time." Nope, just crickets. Blue-belly Matheson was in the boy's room hiding in a stall with his feet in the air, hoping no one would notice him.


Alright, so our House Speaker, Majority Leader and local blue-belly warrior won't do anything, certainly we can call upon our presumptive Presidential candidate to, how shall we say, "act Presidential." He's even made a public commitment to filibuster telecom amnesty. Now we've got ya, Repug totalitarians.
What you say? So acting Presidential is acting bi-partisan now? Not new leadership, just old appeasement to the Bush Administration? Sigh. And we're the party of Harry Truman?

I give up. Who's next in this legislative appeasement policy?


Oh yeah. I forgot.

My Letter to Rep. Matheson

I need some justification for your vote to provide Telecom amnesty for unlawful surveillance of Americans done by the Bush Administration.

To eviscerate the Fourth Amendment to our Constitution on a bi-partisan basis has caused me to wonder to what advantage is there to have a Democrat in Congress, if their devotion to Constitutional principles is on par with their Republican colleagues?

Please provide me with some justification for this bill. If there is some sound justification, perhaps I will reconsider my position. I would appreciate some clarification.

Insert Obi's IRL name here-

Trying to Make Sense of the FISA Capitulation

First of all, I decided not to write about this bill this weekend because I was too hopping mad. When I write when I'm that bent out of shape, who knows who I'm going to tear into. As I've sat back and contemplated, "why would Democratic leaders do this?" I've come to this conclusion. "They were complicit in the whole thing." It to me is the only explanation that makes sense. Democrats were made aware of what the Bush Administration was doing, and complicitly said, "do it." I know it sounds conspiratorial, but it is the only plausible explanation I can think of for their actions. This wasn't about spinelessly going with a corrupt executive, this was about covering their own misdeeds.

A traumatized nation magnified the Al Qaeda victories over us on 9/11 by surrendering many of our most prescious liberties. Democrats were complicit in that surrender. They didn't have the moral courage to stand up and protest and reign in an executive which took on unconstitutional powers in order to "protect us." And outside of a few outspoken liberal bloggers, the public has been silent. Let's admit it, outside of the liberal blogosphere, all I hear are the chirps of crickets. In fact, I found it hard to find a local news outlet to adequately report on what had happened.

The fourth amendment only matters to us liberal bloggers and maybe half of the Democratic Congressional delegation. And we are not a coalition, that is going to preserve our Constitution. This reminds me of a scene from Star Wars episode three: "So this is how democracy ends, with rapturous applause."

293 Yea 129 Nay- Democratic Capitulation of our Constitution

What an embarrassing day for our Republic and for the political party I belong to. Authoritarian conservatives, lockstep support lawlessness, while the best that can be said of Democrats, is that around half of them still believe in the rule of law and in our rights under the Fourth Amendment to our constitution.

The absence of strong principled leadership within my party is truly disconcerting. What this vote may also suggest, is that Democrats were complicit with the Bush Administration in their violating the law, and therefore sought to cover their own tracks through the granting of telecom immunity. The checks and balances our constitution's framers sought to put into place, have disintegrated. Future law-breakers can just have laws passed that retro-actively legalize their actions.

In the words of my mentor Yoda, "how embarrassing."

Blue-belly Democrats- Support the Rule of Law

The time has come for Democrats to actually stand for something. Jim Matheson has that opportunity. Blue-belly Democrats who refer to themselves as "blue dogs" are primed to surrender our Constitutional freedoms under the fourth amendment and grant a corrupt and imperial President, unprecedented powers. They are also primed to grant immunity to telecoms whose complicity in our executive branch's lawbreaking has created a serious Constitutional crisis.

I have no doubt, that Utah's authoritarian conservatives, namely, Hatch, Bennett, Bishop and Cannon will support telecom amnesty and a statutory rape of our freedom from unlawful surveillance. All of them are partisan hacks and respect the constitution as much as they respect the bacon they had for breakfast and just defecated prior to dinner. Bush asks them to jump, and they say how high on their way up. But Matheson, has the freedom to show principle and resolve. He has the truth, and he has the basic and fundamental intent of our founders on his side. If he wishes to oppose the tragic surrender of our civil rights under the Bush Administration's grasping for a FISA bill which grants retro-active immunity for law-breakers, he will show the sort of resolve that Wayne Owens showed when he voted for impeachment of a law-breaking President in Richard M. Nixon.

This issue is so fundamental to our Republic. Will our Congress decide to legitimize law-breaking by statute? Congress, which has oversight responsibilities on the actions of the executive branch cannot abrogate that responsibility without diminishing our Republic to imperial precedent. Will Jim Matheson have the courage and wherewithal to stand for fundamental constitutional principles. Or will he sell out to a fear-mongering executive which uses our fear of terrorism to grant to Al Qaeda further victories by surrendering our collective soul out of basic fear?

The law is the law. If you disagree with the law, change the law. But retro-actively legalizing illegal actions is reprehensible to the principles of the rule of law. What would Scott Matheson jr., a law professor think, of his brother enabling illegal actions by retroactively making them legal? What would his father think? Surrendering to the worst enabling of illegality out of political prudence?

Jim, grow some stones, and Scott, call your brother and set him straight. We are a nation of laws, not of men. Jim can show whether he supports the constitution and the rule of law. Or he can surrender to pragmatic politics.

I'm not a fan of the late Gordon B. Hinckley, but I agree that each of us, must "Stand for Something." Jim Matheson. Stand for the rule of law and oppose the evil and unprecedented FISA law that will come before the U.S. Congress. Show the resolve your predecessor, Wayne Owens showed when he voted for impeachment and probably doomed his ambitions to replace Wallace Bennett in the U.S. Senate. The time has come to show whether a future replica of John F. Kennedy will write of you in their 21st Century version of "Profiles of Courage."

If you read this, please forward this post to Matheson's office.

Thanks.

Gary Pratt- A Tribute

Former Salt Lake County Treasurer, Gary Pratt, died on May 22. I knew Gary Pratt from political circles, and even when I disagreed with him, I found him a real gentleman to deal with. Working with Art Monson at the Salt Lake County Treasurer's office, he succeeded Monson and did a wonderful job, until the idiotic 1994 elections came along and threw out most of the Democratic office holders in the Republican revolution that brought us Enid Waldholtz, Chris Cannon, Mary Callaghan, Doug Short and a whole basket of Republican loonies, many of which remain in office today.

Gary was a loyal Democrat who helped many candidates over the years. He was also heavily involved in the Jaycees, and did a great deal of community service through that organization. Gary took seriously his job as Treasurer and wanted to make sure that people who qualified for certain exemptions from taxes received them. He was especially interested in programs that would help the poor and indigent.

Though sad to hear of his passing, I'm glad his struggle with Alzheimers is over. This insidious disease took Gary from his family and friends long before his heart failed him. We Democrats have lost alot of great people during the past few years. So many stalwarts who fought the brave fight against incredible odds. Rest in peace, my old friend.