I had to chuckle when I read this moment of candor by Attorney General Stumbo (D), shining a little light on the reaction he and Bruce Lunsford (D) often got during the gubernatorial primary. Very amusing:
"Nobody's turned me down yet. That's kind of a breath of fresh air," he said. "When I was calling for Bruce Lunsford's and my campaign (during the Democratic primary for governor), I was getting cussed out every other phone call. So it's been fun again."
Lunsford, who finished a distant second, said he never would rule out another political race, "but it's highly unlikely."
"It looks like hard-core Democrats took me to the woodshed for supporting Ernie four years ago," Lunsford said. Lunsford endorsed Fletcher for governor in 2003.
Sorry for the lack of posts since Friday as we've been out-of-town, but lots going on with just 24 hours until Primary Day.
First, I noticed that Joe Gerth has a segment in his Political Notebook on the attendance of Senate Minority Leader Ed Worley (D) at a Fletcher-Rudolph campaign event:
The blogosphere went crazy last week when pictures appeared showing state Senate Minority Leader Ed Worley and House budget committee Chairman Harry Moberly, both Democrats, speaking from the podium at a Fletcher campaign stop Thursday in Madison County.
Worley, who is supporting Bruce Lunsford in the Democratic primary, says there wasn't anything to it. He said he and Moberly wanted to talk to Fletcher about an economic development issue in Richmond and they didn't see anything wrong with attending the event, which was part of a bus tour Fletcher was doing in the area.
And Worley said he's always gone to meet governors when they came to the county.
"We welcomed him to our community just like we'd welcome any governor to our community, Republican or Democrat," Worley said. And he said he has no compunctions about speaking from behind a podium with Fletcher's campaign logo.
You have to figure this can't sit well with the Democrats who already were leery of Lunsford because of his support for Fletcher during the 2003 general election.
No surprise that a Democratic supporter of Bruce Lunsford (D) would unapologetically attend a Fletcher campaign event, something even Senator McConnell (R) won't do...
The Courier-Journal has just released its numbers from its Blue Grass Poll taken May 10 through May 15. It shows the gubernatorial primary races as follows:
Beshear 27%
Lunsford 21%
Henry 13%
Richards 7%
Galbraith 4%
Hensley 1%Fletcher 41%
Northup 26%
Harper 10%
My quick thoughts: 1) The poll began a week ago, which means it would not have taken full account of strong surges of late by Beshear and Northup; 2) Fletcher has to be terrified that he's only at 41% just a week from the election as the INCUMBENT, knowing that late undecideds rarely break for an incumbent, not to mention what would happen to him in a runoff; 3) how many of Harper voters will cast a vote for the guy who can't win instead of Northup who has a shot?
Now that Bruce Lunsford (D) has begun a methodical attack on Steve Beshear (D) for his stance on expanded-gaming (hypocritically, Lunsford pushed those very same arguments during his failed 2003 gubernatorial bid) will Kentucky Democratic Party Jerry Lundergan admonish Lunsford since he signed the KDP's pledge to run a positive campaign, or was that pledge designed by Lundergan to merely protect Lunsford, his preferred candidate? So far, Lundergan has stayed quiet.
Also, since it's clear that a Beshear victory will result in Lundergan being immediately thrown out of KDP headquarters as chairman, should we begin a collection of moving boxes to help facilitate Lundergan & Crew's departure? Seems that Lundy might not have more than a week left in his incompetent reign.
If fact, if both Beshear and Anne Northup (R) were to win their respective primaries next week, we would get rid of Lundergan and Governor Fletcher (R) in one fell swoop. That would be a whole lot of incompetence out of work at the same time...
Steve Henry (D) continues to demonstrate just how big of a fool he is each and every day during this campaign. I'm speechless by his attack on Attorney General Stumbo (D) during last night's debate:
Henry shot back by questioning the motives of Lunsford’s running mate Stumbo, the attorney general who assigned the prosecutor.
“That’s what he did to the governor,” Henry said, referring to Stumbo’s probe into Fletcher’s hiring practices. “And it seems like if you get in his political way, that’s what he’s going to do to you.”
That comment alone should effectively disqualify Henry from any further consideration. Not only is it an absurd statement but he's just given Governor Fletcher (R) a wet kiss if Henry faced him in a general election. Thankfully, Henry is dropping in the polls faster than an anchor at sea.
I've made no bones about my disgust for Bruce Lunsford (D), but I don't feel the same way about Stumbo. While I'm disappointed that he choose to run with Lunsford, I have only good things to say about his performance -- and that of the many talented people in his office -- during his tenure as attorney general. I was disappointed that they let Fletcher get away without a trial, but I fully understand the thinking behind that decision.
Henry's malicious attack on Stumbo is so outrageous that one can only view it as an act of a desperate candidate who's best day in this race was the day he announced and it's been downhill ever since. I want Stumbo to lose but I have great respect for his work during the past three and a half years. I'm sickened by Henry's statement. So should all Democrats.
The good folks over at Ditch Mitch appear to have the early data from today's Survey USA poll, indicating that Steve Beshear (D) has greatly benefited from Jonathan Miller's (D) withdrawal and endorsement:
(previous results in parentheses):
Assuming these numbers are accurate, the other interesting storyline is that despite dumping million of dollars into this race, Bruce Lunsford (D) isn't getting any more traction this year than in 2003 when he peaked at about 25% and then dropped out.
Not only is Lunsford no sure thing for finishing second, but if Beshear continues to gather steam there's an outside chance he'll pierce 40%. Will Lunsford try to go back on his promise and launch attack ads against Beshear in the final week?
Update: Also according to the Ditch Mitch post, Governor Fletcher (R) has lost some ground but continues to lead Anne Northup (R) by ten points.
Update #2 (12:41 pm): Click here for the actual survey results.
I missed last night's KET Democratic gubernatorial debate but, according to the Courier-Journal's story, it sounds like it was an eventful evening:
Democrats Focus Their Fire On Beshear
Gambling plan, loan ties assailed
By Joseph Gerth and Stephenie Steitzer, The Courier-Journal
LEXINGTON, Ky. — Democratic candidates for governor took aim yesterday at former Lt. Gov. Steve Beshear, criticizing their fellow candidate's reliance on expanded gambling to pay for the state's needs and his role in working for high-interest lenders.
They said the biggest problem with gambling is that it would take several years before the state could benefit from it — and that's if the General Assembly passes legislation next year to allow casino gambling.
"It's just like Wallace Wilkinson," said former Lt. Gov. Steve Henry, invoking the name of Beshear's late political nemesis, who won election in 1987 pushing a state lottery.
"He's trying to perpetrate something that is not going to happen for at least three years."
House Speaker Jody Richards said Beshear didn't understand how difficult it would be to pass such a constitutional amendment as long as David Williams is president of the state Senate.
"Mr. Beshear doesn't seem to realize there is a General Assembly out there," Richards said. After listening to Henry, Richards and Bruce Lunsford take him to task, Beshear said, "I love how all these people plan for failure."
[...]
Richards and Henry also criticized Beshear for his work as a lawyer and lobbyist for the Kentucky Deferred Deposit Association in the late 1990s. The group represents payday lenders that charge high interest rates.
Beshear contended that he actually helped the state pass restrictions on the industry, limiting interest rates and the number of times the businesses could "roll over," or reissue, the loans.
In fact, he fought against more strict rules.
"Mr. Beshear, I know you're a great lawyer, but I don't think that is going to sit with the voters. The bottom line is you represented the industry," Henry said, calling Beshear's explanation "a little far-fetched."
Richards then jumped in, criticizing a bill Beshear supported in 1998, saying it allows excessive interest and needs to be more restrictive.
"Mr. Speaker, as I remember, the House and Senate overwhelmingly passed it and you voted for it," Beshear shot back.
[...]
When a panelist asked the candidates about the practice of sitting governors using a state plane to attend campaign events, all said they would not do so if elected.
A panelist followed up by pointing out that Beshear was reported to have used a state plane more than 200 times while he was lieutenant governor under then-Gov. Martha Layne Collins.
Before the debate ended, the Lunsford campaign seized upon the issue, releasing a statement that showed reports of Beshear's use of the state plane, many of which occurred while he was running for governor when he was lieutenant governor.
Beshear said after the debate that he used the plane to appear in his official capacity at civic events, festivals and parades, not to attend fundraisers.
Asked whether those events blur the line between official and campaign use, Beshear said the General Assembly should develop a clear set of guidelines "so that it will be clear not only to the governor and the lieutenant governor, but also the people in the state as to exactly when you can use the state aircraft and when you should not."
I'm looking forward to the Survey USA results that will be released today. I've heard that the Blue Grass Poll is expected to be released tomorrow as well.
With less than two weeks to go in the gubernatorial primary, organized labor is dramatically escalating its voter education on the pariah also known as Bruce Lunsford (D).
Its recently-formed 527 group, known as Working Families for Kentucky, has just released a television spot reminding Democratic primary voters how Lunsford joined in an effort with Senator McConnell (R) and Kentucky Republicans to destroy the Democratic Party and force four years of Governor Ernie Fletcher (R) down our throats.
Now Lunsford wants us to trust him again and make him our Democratic nominee for governor? How stupid does he think the voters are?
Here's their press release and television ad:
Working Families For Kentucky Inc. releases 30-second spot
about Bruce Lunsford and Ernie Fletcher
Contact: Larry T. Fox (502) 582-3508 ext. 104
Working Families for Kentucky, Inc. today releases a recorded 30-second spot to educate the public in preparation for the May 22 gubernatorial primary election. Entitled “Endorsed”, it shows recorded 2003 footage of then-Republican candidate for governor Ernie Fletcher welcoming Democratic candidate Bruce Lunsford’s endorsement following Lunsford’s withdrawal from the 2003 Democratic primary for governor. Lunsford is again running for the Democratic nomination for governor this year.
“Endorsed” can be found at the following YouTube link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=562k_ENRiTI
Working Families for Kentucky, Inc. may air the spot soon.
If you haven't noticed, I don't spend much time discussing newspaper endorsements of candidates. Aside from them being overrated, I find myself so disappointed that, in their quest to be players and king-makers, rarely does an editorial board embrace a candidate not among the leaders in the polls, even if they believe they're the best of the bunch. You just never see it, and that's not just a Kentucky problem.
Having said that, I found it significant that LEO -- after deciding to endorse Jonathan Miller (D) just as he withdrew from the race -- quickly threw its support behind Steve Beshear (D). I would have predicted Bruce Lunsford (D) to be next on their list, since he has managed to buy trick garner support among some younger voters. So, I encourage you to read the editorial LEO put out for its nearly 200,000 readers in Louisville to digest.
Also, watch Jim Milliman's scathing editorial for WAVE-TV (Louisville) on "Fletcher's Unbridled Scandal." Really hard-hitting stuff on Fletcher's unethical reign.
Lots of media stories this morning on how a number of Democratic gubernatorial candidates took Steve Beshear (D) to task at yesterday's AARP forum because of his one-size-fits-all answer response to how to fix what ills Kentucky: expanded-gaming.
I agree with the criticism, and even raised it in January.
As someone who is not particularly opposed to expanded-gaming, I continue to be troubled by Beshear's singular response of "expanded-gaming" to seemingly any question about issues or leadership, even though the best-case scenario for any such revenue wouldn't come until 2009. For many of us looking for real leadership after what we've dealt with over the past three years, this hardly satisfies our hunger. It's also the reason that I'm lukewarm on Beshear.
However, as disappointed as I am with the lack of breadth of Beshear's vision, I'm even more disappointed with the disingenuous and flip-flopping comments on expanded-gaming by both Jody Richards (D) and Bruce Lunsford (D).
During the 2003 campaign, Lunsford was just as aggressive on expanded-gaming as Beshear is now. Funny how he's changed his tune on this issue -- among so many others -- since his failed 2003 run. Back then, Lunsford lectured us as follows:
Owensboro Messenger-Inquirer (Apr 23, 2003):
If Bruce Lunsford is elected governor in November, he says he will push hard to get a constitutional amendment allowing six to eight land-based casinos in Kentucky on the ballot in 2004.
"We're almost being foolish to continue to allow $300 million a year (from Kentuckians) to go to out-of-state casinos in Indiana and Illinois," the Louisville millionaire businessman said Tuesday during a news conference at the Daviess County Courthouse.
Lunsford said six to eight sites for casinos should be selected by a state gaming board, appointed by the governor and approved by the state Senate. Money from gaming should be restricted to education and helping problem gamblers, he said.
[...]
"Children are leaving this state because of a lack of opportunity," Lunsford said. "This is uppermost in my mind. I want it on the ballot in November 2004 and hopefully we can see construction starting in 2005."
Herald-Leader (Apr 24, 2003):
Giving new political life to the notion of expanding gambling, Democratic candidate for governor Bruce Lunsford is touting casinos as a solution to Kentucky's budget problems.
Lunsford's endorsement of a constitutional amendment to allow for six to eight land-based casinos across Kentucky marks the first time a large-scale expansion of gambling has emerged as a statewide campaign issue in 16 years.
...Lunsford's gambit could air the issue of expanding gambling more fully than it has been previously by forcing his opponents in the Democratic primary to take fully defined positions on it.
...Lunsford called it "a cop-out" to be neutral on an amendment.
"I don't think it has any chance unless the governor plays an active role in pushing it," he said.
...Lunsford said casinos are necessary to increase revenue as well as stop money from flowing across state lines to Indiana casinos.
"We're basically shooting ourselves in the foot by not being able to have a piece of all that revenue," he said.
Kentucky Post (May 1, 2003):
Democrat Bruce Lunsford said gambling is already available in Kentucky through wagering at the horse tracks, off-track betting parlors and bingo games and the state should consider legalizing land-based casinos to bring in millions to fund education and other state needs.
"Let's get it off the table," said Lunsford, a wealthy Louisville businessman who grew up in Kenton County. "They've been discussing it for 10 years. Let's get it on the ballot."
Lunsford is proposing a constitutional amendment, which would have to be approved by voters, that would legalize a limited number of casinos in Kentucky. He said he would want it to require that a major portion of the revenues realized by casinos go to Kentucky's public education system.
On the other hand, Jody Richards (D) has been pathetic on this topic with ever-shifting positions over the years. Yesterday, he acknowledged changing his position and is now opposed to gaming. But Richards' flip-flop is only the latest in truly contradictory positions by him over the years:
AP (Apr 2, 2007):
Richards:
"I support giving the voters of the commonwealth a chance to voice their opinion on expanded gaming in Kentucky. I personally support expanded gaming at Kentucky racetracks and a limited number of other locations."
Herald-Leader (Jan 25, 2007):
Richards told reporters he and Brown favored Kentuckians voting on whether to approve expanded gaming, but wouldn't say whether he'd push for or against it.
Bowling Green Daily News (Dec 17, 2006):
[State Sen. David] Boswell said he isn't sure where some southcentral Kentucky lawmakers stand on the hot-button issue, but he said House Speaker Jody Richards, D-Bowling Green, has been ambiguous.
“He's kind of danced around the issue depending on where is,” Boswell said, citing some of Richards' speaking engagements. “He's never come right out and said he's for it or against it - not here, anyway.”
AP (Mar 21, 2006):
The House Rules Committee has five legislative days to decide what to do with the bill. As of Monday, there was no decision on the measure, which would ask voters to decide whether to amend the constitution to allow up to nine casinos in Kentucky.
Richards, asked Monday about the bill's fate, said, "It sort of depends on what the members want to do."
Asked why it had not been returned to a committee, he said, "Because there are five of us in (House Democratic) leadership." Richards, D-Bowling Green, did not elaborate.
Herald-Leader (Mar 9, 2006):
House Speaker Jody Richards, D-Bowling Green, said he hasn't polled the 100 members to see how a proposed amendment might fare. He acknowledged that Democratic leaders have discussed the issue but wouldn't say whether they've taken a position.
Glasgow Daily Times (Dec 11, 2005):
“Personally, I’m not in favor of expanded gaming.” Richards said, who also questions how unified supporters are. “Until they can get House members together, I’m just going to sort of work with the House members.”
Courier-Journal (Feb 28, 2003):
Richards said he had long opposed any move toward expansion of gambling, "but I am at the point where I believe that the right thing to do is pass a constitutional amendment in the legislature and let the people vote in that issue.''
I'm so incredibly underwhelmed with our remaining choices for Democratic nominee for governor. I can see why Secretary of State Trey Grayson (R) projects less than 15% turnout...
A member of organized labor sent me the following concerning my earlier post about which Democratic gubernatorial candidates will replace KDP Chairman Jerry Lundergan should they win the primary, as the rules allow:
On March 29 and 30, 2007, at the Embassy Suites Hotel in Lexington, KY, Steve Henry, Jody Richards, Jonathan Miller and Steve Beshear spoke to the UMWA 's Coal Miners Political Action Committee. In the presence of approximately 35 UMWA members each Candidate was ask the question if they would replace Jerry Lundergan as KDP Chair. Steve Beshear and Jonathan Miller responded without hesitation that they would replace Jerry Lundergan. Steve Henry defended Lundergan and indicated he would not remove Lundergan. Steve Henry then made the comment from the podium to give him a name that would be better. The Chair of the meeting responded,"Just throw a rock out in the crowd, anybody you hit would be better" this got quite a laugh out of the group and clearly Henry was displeased with the joke. Jody Richards bragged on Lundergan and tried to avoid answering the question but when pressed Richards refused to say he would remove Lundergan. There you have it.
Sadly, Jody is not giving undecided Democrats many reasons to support him.
One question that I would encourage a reporter to ask the remaining Democratic gubernatorial candidates is this:
Democratic Party rules allow its gubernatorial nominee to select the party chairman of his choosing. If you win the nomination, will you ask Jerry Lundergan to remain as chairman or will you bring in new leadership for the KDP for the general election?
While some supporters of Jonathan Miller (D) are trying to determine whether to back Steve Beshear (D) or Jody Richards (D), this question might be the deciding factor for many Democrats who are looking for good government and honest, ethical leadership running the Kentucky Democratic Party.
We all know that Bruce Lunsford (D) and Steve Henry (D) have embraced the extension of Lundergan's failed leadership if they win. We also know that Beshear is no fan of the current regime. But I've not seen where Richards has made clear his intention and how he answers this question may very well determine how much of Miller's support he can hope to receive.
For many, including myself, this question is as important as any issue a candidate is asked to give. It's time all Democratic candidates are put on-the-record to tell us whether the disastrous and embarrassing reign of Jerry Lundergan will come to an end if they are nominated.
Six months ago, all Democratic eyes were fixed on whether the state's two most popular Democrats -- U.S. Rep. Ben Chandler (D) and Louisville Mayor Jerry Abramson (D) -- would run for governor this year. They both demurred, and disappointed many.
Since then, seven Democrats did join the race, and polls show that its two most baggage-laden, ethically-challenged candidates -- Bruce Lunsford (D) and Steve Henry (D) -- have been leading the pack the entire way.
However, we've not heard a peep from either Chandler or Abramson about this race.
While it's understandable why they would opt not to take sides, it's not acceptable that they've gone into hiding while noticing that the Democratic electorate seems foolishly ready to nominate either Lunsford or Henry and doom our chances in the fall, particularly if Republican manage to get their collective act together and throw Governor Fletcher (R) overboard.
The narrative of this primary season has given us three very unexpected heroes in an effort to deny either Lunsford or Henry the nomination:
So, where are Chandler and Abramson? When are they going to demonstrate some leadership and match the efforts of organized labor, Holland and Miller? Or are they determined to remain in their safe, comfortable cocoon, to hell with the Democratic Party which looks to them for leadership? Chandler's silence is particularly disappointing given what Lunsford did to him in 2003 with the millions of dollars in bogus attack ads and then the betrayal of endorsing Fletcher in the fall after previously promising to support the Democratic nominee.
It's time for Chandler and Abramson to show some leadership.
It's time they make clear that Democrats must win back the Governor's Mansion in the fall and cannot afford to nominate either Lunsford or Henry. To do so would jeopardize our hopes of winning and would ensure that the Kentucky Democratic Party will be run by the same lackluster, egocentric, and unprincipled bunch of good ol' boys led by Jerry Lundergan.
It's time to step-up, Ben and Jerry. Many of us have sacrificed. When will you? There's only two weeks until the May 22 primary. Don't let us down, again.
Update: Meanwhile, the Courier-Journal offered two editorials this morning on the race -- one praised Miller and his decision to endorse Beshear, the other blasted Henry for deceiving voters that he still practices medicine at U of L. This is the very type of leadership we need from Ben and Jerry in the remaining days.
Steve Henry (D) is truly pathological.
From Joe Gerth:
Despite what he claims on his Web site and in literature handed out by his campaign, former Lt. Gov. Steve Henry no longer practices medicine at University Hospital.
Published materials say Henry, an orthopedic surgeon, "continues to practice in Emergency Trauma at the University of Louisville Hospital."
In fact, Henry isn't practicing medicine anywhere now, and his relationship with the school ended Dec. 31 when his appointment as a volunteer professor expired, according to Ellen de Graffenreid, a U of L spokeswoman.
De Graffenreid refused to say why Henry's appointment was allowed to expire, and U of L refused to turn over documents that might explain.
[...]
Despite that, Henry has left it on his Web site, and his campaign makes a big deal of the fact that Henry is a physician. After he told Dunlop he planned to return to U of L, he was reminded the school allowed his appointment to lapse.
Mark Hebert adds that Henry lied to him not long ago about this very thing and offered that his departure from U of L was suspended at his request.
It's startling how many similarities Fletcher, Henry and Lunsford share...
Herb Brock has an excellent political column in the latest Danville Advocate-Messenger about the two guys trying to buy this election with their own money and the one trying to do the same thing with taxpayer money:
Off The Record: Millionaires Not Worth A Dime As Gubernatorial Prospects
By Herb Brock, Danville Advocate-Messenger
If you plan to vote later this month in the Democratic or Republican gubernatorial primary, and your sole sources of information have been TV and radio commercials, you probably have concluded that there are only two candidates - Democrat Bruce Lunsford and Republican Billy Harper.
Other candidates have run ads - such as Democrats Steve Beshear and Jonathan Miller and Republicans Anne Northrup and His Incumbency, Ernie Fletcher - but Lunsford and Harper have dominated the air waves. And it will be a sad thing if their commercial domination translates into electoral domination.
In my view, these two millionaires are not worth a dime as gubernatorial prospects.
[...]
While Lunsford and Harper are spending obscene amounts of their personal fortunes on their campaigns, the real obscenity of this election is the amount of tax money that His Incumbency is spending on his. While Lunsford and Harper are blowing their money, Fletcher is spending yours.
The governor has been going around the state - including several stops in this area - handing out state checks for a variety of projects. The governor can argue that these projects were approved by various state and federal bodies and that they were in the pipeline, but isn't funny how the pipeline suddenly started flowing so fast just before the primary.
But Fletcher isn't the first incumbent for public office to use government projects and funds as political tools that, in effect, are an attempt to buy an election. It's just that his doing it is yet another example of how he has violated his 2003 campaign promise to do away with "business as usual" in Frankfort. Under Fletcher, business has been more usual than ever before.
I thought the same thing while watching the Democratic lieutenant governor's debate on KET earlier this week:
Steve Henry’s running mate Renee True demonstrated her primary qualification: she said yes when Henry asked her to run. Henry – despite his denials – was reported to have been turned down several times in his search for a running mate before True accepted. Her performance Monday was painful to watch.
My favorite part was how True continued to defend Henry's countless legal problem on the sole premise that they were "unproven." Not innocent. Not even a lame attempt to call them political. Just "unproven."
On another point, why hasn't anyone noted that during a discussion in the debate about guns Greg Stumbo (D) stated that legal immigrants should not be able to own a firearm?
His statement, and I'm working off my notes, was that "aliens in this country -- legally or illegally -- should not be able to buy a gun."
Not allowing "legal aliens" access to gun ownership is quite a departure from current law and something I'm certain is not embraced by the NRA, whose 100% rating Stumbo boasted about at the beginning of his remark. Someone might take a closer look at this (and maybe advise the NRA). According to one top national blog "federal law bars most nonresident aliens, including illegal aliens, from possessing a gun, but treats resident aliens the same as citizens."
Also, I recall vividly recall immediately after September 11th how the Bush Administration's Justice Department refused to cooperate with the FBI in allowing access to gun records of the 1,200 detained (mostly non-citizens) in the weeks following the attack. So, not only were they able to legally purchase weapons, but then that information was barred from 9/11 investigators, further compounding the matter.
In any event, check out the KET footage for yourself. According to my notes, it happened early in the program...
Awesome!
Once again, organized labor is making crystal clear its disdain for Bruce Lunsford (D) and they aren't just going to talk the talk during this primary. It appears they are loading-up their big guns to take down this pariah, and the Democratic Party faithful should be thankful for this effort. Significantly, this group is made up of unions that are supporting different candidates, or none at all. While the fools at KDP (who are whole-heartedly backing Lunsford) will try to blame Lunsford's opponents for this effort, that is sure to fail.
The beauty of this effort is that 527 efforts allow unlimited sums of money from individuals and corporations to run their ads, and donors may remain wholly anonymous, if they prefer, which should provide an effective outlet for donors of the other Democratic candidates in this primary. While the Lunsford campaign will whine, there is nothing improper about 527 efforts as nearly all groups that advertise on television, be it the NRA or Sierra Club, do so through their 527 entities.
There's another crucial aspect to this effort.
Since Lunsford will certainly have spots for the runoff -- should he make it -- cut before the May 22 primary so that he can go on the air as soon as May 23, this 527 will have a ready-made vehicle to neutralize Lunsford on May 23 as well as they will already have, presumably, relevant ads that would be ready to launch. This indirectly takes the pressure off Lunsford's runoff opponent.
Finally, assuming this group is adequately funded, this should be a real problem for Lunsford. Typically, while negative ads have a serious impact on its intended target, they often bring down the candidate that runs them as well (see Lunsford's 2003 attacks against Ben Chandler). But in this instance, the ads will certainly damage Lunsford without damage to any other candidates.
We should be saluting labor for this effort. They are doing the Kentucky Democratic Party an incredible public service by exposing this charlatan. And isn't it fitting that the man who made a fortune with nursing homes that abused and evicted low income seniors will himself be under attack by a bunch of blue-collar workers who are fed-up with the Ken Lay's of the world exploiting working families? Especially one that destroyed the Democratic Party's chances in 2003 with the millions of dollars of attacks he launched against Chandler.
This couldn't have happened to a more deserving pariah.
Labor Forms '527' Against Lunsford
Jack Brammer, Herald-Leader
FRANKFORT -- Several labor officials have set up an independent, tax-exempt group that can raise unlimited dollars to work against Bruce Lunsford, a Louisville businessman who is running for governor in the May 22 Democratic primary election.
Working Families for Kentucky Inc. is the first so-called “527” group that has signaled it will get involved in the primary election.
[...]
The advantage of 527 groups -- so named because of the IRS provision that governs them -- is that they can raise unlimited funds from individuals and spend it on advocacy ads as long as the organization doesn’t conspire with political parties or candidates.
...Steve Earle, legislative field director for the United Mine Workers of America in Kentucky, said Working Families for Kentucky is “committed to educating our members about why Mr. Lunsford should not be governor of Kentucky.”
Earle, a director of the group, said it anticipates running TV ads before the primary. He declined to say how much money it has and expects to raise. He did stress that the UMWA has not endorsed any candidate in the race for governor.
Earle referred other questions to Larry T. Fox, who is listed as incorporator and a director of the 527. Fox, pension fund administrator for the Louisville-based United Food and Commercial Workers Local 227, declined to comment.
[...]
Lunsford has acknowledged he made a mistake in supporting Fletcher and says he is committed to helping labor.
Adam Bozzi, a spokesman for the Lunsford campaign, said last night that Lunsford and Stumbo “have strong labor support from working families throughout Kentucky.”
Regarding the new 527 group, Bozzi said, “We hope this is not an attempt to circumvent campaign finance laws and launch nasty and negative personal attacks as these swift boat-type organizations generally do.”
You gotta love the clueless reaction of KDP Chairman Jerry Lundergan who was probably wearing his Lunsford-Stumbo button while commenting:
Lundergan said he is not concerned about the formation of Working Families but is concerned “that a small segment of the labor community is going to work against a candidate.
“Don’t they realize who the enemy is? The enemy is the three Republicans running for governor. What will this little group do if Lunsford wins the nomination? They will make it hard on labor across the state. I don’t understand what they gain by this. It appears this little group has to be supporting somebody else.”
Yes, Jerry, we know who the enemy is in this primary and you're one of them. Don't get too comfortable over at headquarters because these labor bad asses are coming after you too with this effort, and you're as big a fool as we suspected if you think this is a "little group". Word is that there's national backing for this effort...
This might be the best attempt at re-invention I've ever seen in my 4+ years in Kentucky. Even more than our unethical Governor Fletcher (R) has tried to offer. But when you're on the ticket trying to buy the election, I guess the truth becomes irrelevant.
I introduce to you the new and improved Greg Stumbo (D), a man who apparently suffers from a serious form of amnesia, or simply brazen hypocrisy. You be the judge:
“People are fed up with backroom handshakes, secret deals that benefit insiders, and lobbyists who peddle influence to the highest bidder. Voters want a governor and a state government that works for the people, not the special interests.” Stumbo said.
How many "backroom handshakes" or "secret deals that benefit insiders" do you think Majority Floor Leader Greg Stumbo (D) was involved with in all his years in the General Assembly?
Astounding and audacious.
As I'm sure you know, the latest Survey USA poll was released yesterday.
I wanted to vomit.
Not because the numbers for candidates I am rooting for were not as good as other recent surveys I've seen (though certainly that's part of it). Mainly I wanted to vomit out of a profound sadness that Kentucky primary voters are inclined to nominate (runoff notwithstanding) the two biggest pariahs to face each other in the fall (Ernie Fletcher and Bruce Lunsford), setting up a fall campaign that would be tantamount to the 1991 Louisiana Governor's race between the crook, Edwin Edwards (D), and the racist, David Duke (R).
That year, Louisiana voters were faced with such an unimaginable choice between two evils that bumper stickers on cars contained slogans such as "Vote for the Crook. It's Important," and "Vote for the Lizard, not the Wizard." It's amazing to me that the two candidates solidly opposed by the thoughtful core of each political party could possibly be leading with three weeks to go, albeit with percentages of just 29% and 46%, hardly indicators of strong support.
Though, I can't fathom being faced with such a situation this fall because 1) there's no chance that I would consider a vote for Bruce Lunsford in the fall regardless of who the Republican nominate (my party loyalty stops with him), and 2) there's no chance that I could ever cast a vote for someone so incompetent and dishonest as Fletcher, a man who is effectively Judas in Jesus clothing.
(Note: While I feel almost that way about Steve Henry (D), at least I believe, based on his demonstrated history, that Henry is a Democrat. A dishonest, pathological, unethical, manipulative, cheating, thieving Democrat...but a Democrat. Hence, I would vote for Henry over Fletcher...at least. Lunsford isn't a Democrat, he's a political opportunist. His political contributions, his support of Fletcher and other Kentucky Republicans, his long-time friendship with McConnell, his clear anti-union practices over the years, give us every reason to doubt that man has any core political beliefs (just like Fletcher), yet alone Democratic ones.)
So, if Survey USA is accurate, this will likely be the first election in my lifetime where the best choice is to exercise my right not to cast a vote for governor. There are plenty of excellent candidates running down-ballot that I am eager to support, but I will certainly skip the first race if I must choose between two pariahs. There is no "lesser" between the two that I've yet to discern.
So, yes, I was disappointed with Survey USA. While I have some serious qualms with some of its findings (like an unbelievably low 7% undecided among Democrats), I'm saddened more than anything.
As far as candidates go, they should always trust their own pollsters. You don't spend tens of thousands of dollars to do your own research and then throw it away when an independent poll contradicts it. If that was the case, John Yarmuth (D) would have closed-down his shop after the Bluegrass Poll showed him trailing Anne Northup (R) by six points with barely a week to go. Independent polls are very useful in that they help you see trends. They are powerful when they confirm what your poll tells you. But when they vastly depart from your own poll, you don't change course. You keep fighting. You stick to your campaign plan. And then you hope that your next poll doesn't mimic the independent poll. But there are still three weeks to go and we've not even reached Derby yet.
But if Survey USA is to believed, we ought to brush-up on our Edwards v. Duke history and see how Louisianans dealt with it. Ultimately, Edwards won that election but, not unexpectedly, was later convicted on 17 federal criminal counts including racketeering and extortion and is in federal prison until 2011. Meanwhile, David Duke, who also found himself in legal hot water, has most recently been seen in Tehran at a conference held by Iranian President Ahmadinejad questioning the Holocaust, where he told the delegation that gas chambers were not used to kill six million Jews. Louisiana voters were right on the money about these two characters.
God save the Commonwealth...
Daily Kos has a very interesting post about Doug Schoen, a so-called Democratic consultant who's got a history of crossing party lines to work with Republicans (Michael Bloomberg) and quasi-Republicans (Joe Lieberman) and who defends Fox News without disclosing he's a paid contributor, and regularly defends the big drug companies without disclosing he's paid by them as well.
Well, there's a perfect Kentucky tie to Schoen and his ties to Republicans and Republican-backers. Turns out he's one of Bruce Lunsford's (D) top political consultants. How fitting.
As we all know, Lunsford is the most Republican candidate, running as a Democrat, west of Connecticut. I guess no other legitimate Democratic consultants would agree to work for a Democratic candidate who:
Updates on fundraising figures from Democratic gubernatorial candidates (these are unofficial numbers):
I'll offer an analysis a little later (the only real surprise was Henry's million dollar personal contribution), but it is noteworthy how much more money was raised by Democratic candidates than Republican candidates (not including loans) since January 1 -- approximately $3.5 million compared to about $2.5 million. With an incumbent Republican governor, you wouldn't expect such a disparity.
The Big Sandy News blasts both Bruce Lunsford (D) and Steve Beshear (D) today in an editorial regarding their plagiarism of campaign plans.
Here's an excerpt:
Voters Should Give Candidates A Failing Grade
Big Sandy News Editorial
Revelations that two Democratic gubernatorial campaigns lifted word-for-word ideas from other campaigns says a lot about the candidates involved and is yet another sad example of the state of politics.
The Bruce Lunsford/Greg Stumbo gubernatorial campaign last week was accused of plagiarizing the campaign of failed Florida Democratic candidate for governor Jim Davis. While claiming his "Blueprint for Change" campaign document was not lifted from Davis' campaign, Lunsford accused Democratic challenger Steve Beshear and running mate Daniel Mongiardo of stealing from the successful campaign of Iowa Democratic candidate Chet Culver.
It doesn't take an English or journalism professor to tell us that both the Lunsford and Beshear camps are guilty of plagiarism, and Democratic voters should give both candidates failing grades in next month's primary for governor.
An "F" is what a high school or college English teacher gives students who plagiarize someone else's work, and the Lunsford and Beshear campaigns should not be treated any differently by voters. Plagiarism, in whatever form, is wrong and should not be tolerated. Presenting someone else's words and ideas as your own is dishonest and unethical, and voters should be offended that candidates for the state's highest office would stoop to such trickery and deceit. If they're doing this as candidates, imagine what they would do if elected governor...
This is pretty dang funny.
If you've watched the Lunsford-Stumbo television ads about their plagiarized campaign plan which we now call the Glueprint for Change you'll know that Lunsford asks viewers for their opinions and they want to know "what you think." In fact, on their website's "blog" was a thread titled "Blueprint Feedback" that -- prior to the plagiarism discovery -- had hundreds of comments from their supporters about the plan.
In fact, the post began like this:
The campaign has been pleasantly surprised by the volume of feedback to the Blueprint for Change (Go to the bottom of the page to read the comments).
When you visit that same thread now, all the comments are gone...All of them.
I guess they no longer care what you think...
Recent Comments