Home > elections > Solomon campaign event tonight

Solomon campaign event tonight

Media Critic Jeff Cohen to Speak in Support of Democratic congressional candidate Norman Solomon

Nationally respected media critic and TV news commentator Jeff Cohen will make a campaign stop in Eureka this Tuesday in support of Democratic congressional candidate Norman Solomon. The event will run from 6 to 8 p.m. at the Labor Temple, 840 E Street, Eureka. Cohen will speak about corporate power, media bias, and the need for principled political leadership.

Cohen has appeared regularly on national TV and radio. He was a daily commentator on MSNBC in 2002, a weekly panelist on the Fox News Channel’s “News Watch” from 1997–2002, and a co-host of CNN’s “Crossfire” in 1996. He was senior producer of MSNBC’s Phil Donahue show until it was terminated on the eve of the Iraq war.

As founder of the media watchdog group Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR), Cohen has worked closely with Solomon. In the 1990s, they co-wrote the nationally-syndicated column “Media Beat.” They have also co-authored three books on media bias and politics.

  1. November 22, 2011 at 10:17 am

    Solomon and Adams are two Democratic candidates that look pretty good to me. I do so want to work with progressive Democrats, Greens and other independent lefts like me to elect democratic socialist candidates.

    Might I ask my progressive and liberal Democratic friends to ask Obama to get the federal boot off of the occupy movement and the medical marijuana economy?

    And I am curious who the Republicans will be voting for as there will most likely be a Dem vs Dem runoff in the fall.

    have a peaceful day,
    Bill

  2. November 22, 2011 at 10:23 am

    And I am curious who the Republicans will be voting for as there will most likely be a Dem vs Dem runoff in the fall.

    That will be interesting to see. I would hope to see a lot of them not voting in the general election as I expect to do, but I’ve heard so much from the partisan Reps and Dems about the lesser of two evils I’m sure most will vote for someone.

    The more important concern would be who the Decline to State voters go for as they’re the fastest group of voters.

  3. November 22, 2011 at 10:24 am

    I meant fastest growing group of voters.

  4. November 22, 2011 at 10:42 am

    I think the idea of registering independent (decline to state) is a good one. People please avoid registering with American Independent Party as that is now just a creature of the Christofascist “Constitution Party.”

    Do not confuse “independent” with AIP.

    have a peaceful day,
    Bill

  5. November 22, 2011 at 11:05 am

    I could be wrong but, unless they’ve changed it, I don’t believe you can register as “Independent” in California, unless you write it in. Thus, most people see the Independent in the American Independent Party and register with them assuming they’re registering as an Independent.

    The AIP never has been an actual “Independent” party. It hails from George Wallace’s American Taxpayer’s Party from way back when. Now it has different names in different states. I think we might have both here but I understand they’re pretty much the same and have been trying to unify under one name with the exception of a few in one faction or the other.

    I believe the AIP is California’s third largest party by registration. Most agree there’s no way they’d have that kind of numbers without a lot of people mistakenly registering with them to be “Independents”.

  6. November 22, 2011 at 11:10 am

    Yes it was originally George Wallace’s electoral vehicle in a third party run, I think 1968.

    After that they struggled for a while to become a legitimate third party with a real conservative voice. Alas, like so many right wing efforts when you remove the racism it loses steam.

    have a peaceful day,
    Bill

  7. Anonymous
    November 22, 2011 at 1:17 pm

    Notable local Dems already endorsed Huffman.

    Will their Central Committee follow-suit?

    Rarely does a candidate of Norman Solomon’s stature step-up to run for office. His life-long activism, research, publications, and dedication to progressive values make him a master of the issues that Huffman and Adams espouse. Solomon is a gifted speaker who would quickly distinguish himself in any debate with his trademark of dispassionate, encyclopedic reasoning.

    Unfortunately, so-called “pragmatists” control the local democratic party that recently mailed another fund-raising letter referring to the Humboldt Democratic Central Committee’s “aggressive registration of new Democratic voters”!

    The progressive wing of the HCDCC organized the ONLY registration canvass in decades, yet, only one out of six total participants was a member of the HCDCC! Both party’s movers and shakers claim to want these new-participants, but, both party’s concerns over the unwanted consequences condemn actual efforts.

    Thus, “pragmatic” democrats are their own worst enemy, failing to focus outreach and education on the 50% of non-participants, forcing democrat’s continued appeal to their opponent’s values to “win” a few candidates while losing the war for progressive change.

  8. Decline To State
    November 22, 2011 at 1:44 pm

    The more important concern would be who the Decline to State voters go for as they’re the fastest group of voters

    I think you were right the first time Fred. I’m pretty darned fast.

  9. Not A Native
    November 22, 2011 at 2:39 pm

    Anon 1:17, sounds to me like you have some kind of axe to grind against some HCDCC members.

    There’s zero chance a Republican can win in this district so Democrats here don’t need to be ‘pragmatic’. They can support the bluest Democrat and not fear it will result in splitting the Dem. vote and cause a Rep. win.

    On the other hand, its reasonable to guess that ‘pragmatic’ Republicans might give their votes to the reddest Democrat.

  10. November 22, 2011 at 3:24 pm

    And the point of voting for any of these bought and paid for whores is what? Business as usual?

  11. November 22, 2011 at 6:29 pm

    “Rarely does a candidate of Norman Solomon’s stature step-up to run for office.”

    That sounds like professional PR. Do we really need more of that?

    “His life-long … dedication to progressive values make him a master of the issues … Solomon is a gifted speaker who would quickly distinguish himself in any debate with his trademark of dispassionate, encyclopedic reasoning.”

    Now you’re sounding creepy.

  12. jr
    November 22, 2011 at 6:32 pm

    Read “False Hope”, Solomon’s book on the Clinton Administration.

  13. November 22, 2011 at 6:39 pm

    I won’t be able to make it to the Labor Temple tonight but I find lots of Solomons positions agreeable.

    Can some one ask him what he will do if he is elected to Congress and President Obama starts a war with Iran?

    have a peaceful day,
    Bill

  14. November 23, 2011 at 7:50 am

    NAN wrote, “There’s zero chance a Republican can win in this district so Democrats here don’t need to be ‘pragmatic’.”.

    Keep in mind we’ve had Republicans win the congressional seat in the past. Frank Riggs was the last one. It might not be as clear cut as you think.

    For state assembly and senate there’s never been a Republican win in the 37 years I’ve lived up here, although Rob Brown from came surprisingly close to Patty Berg some years ago.

  15. Eric Kirk
    November 23, 2011 at 8:39 am

    That was a much different seat Fred. With Sonoma County and Marin replacing Napa, Lake, and Solano, the Frank Riggs effect is pretty much dead.

  16. November 23, 2011 at 8:44 am

    Good point. I suspect it will be the same across the state and that the new redistricting just cemented the Democrats’ hold on the state. Thought it might be that way from the beginning.

  17. Eric Kirk
    November 23, 2011 at 8:50 am

    I did manage to stop in to the event on my way home. Anybody going to these things this early are probably potential core supporters. If so, the usual suspects turning out for Solomon are a pretty good group to have behind you.

    However, I spoke to a fairly solidly left wing activist at Clif’s event who said that he is supporting Jared Huffman because he has the best capability to get something done in Congress.

    But there is also a large contingent of progressives supporting Adams. And Andy Caffrey says that he is getting good response as well.

    Huffman is certainly the front runner, but if someone gets into a runoff with him, who knows?

  18. November 23, 2011 at 8:50 am

    Well Fred it wasn’t just the Democratic Party that pushed for this redistricting. Republicans wanted to gerrymander some safe districts too. The interests of you local Republicans and Librepublicans were sold out in the interests of some downstate Republican big shot.

    have a peaceful day,
    Bill

  19. Eric Kirk
    November 23, 2011 at 8:52 am

    Fred – well, I think that Thompson may face a little bit more of a Republican challenge in his new district. A little bit more anyway.

  20. Eric Kirk
    November 23, 2011 at 8:59 am

    Actually HB, both party leaderships opposed the measure.

  21. November 23, 2011 at 9:05 am

    They may have opposed the measure but the incumbents are enjoying the results. Personally I hope it does swing the assembly to the Democrats so we can clear this logjam. Maybe we can get Proposition 13 changed to conform with today’s realities.

    have a peaceful day,
    Bill

  22. Anonymous
    November 23, 2011 at 1:03 pm

    Joel Mielke says:
    November 22, 2011 at 6:29 pm

    “ ‘Rarely does a candidate of Norman Solomon’s stature step-up to run for office’.

    That sounds like professional PR. Do we really need more of that?

    ‘His life-long … dedication to progressive values make him a master of the issues … Solomon is a gifted speaker who would quickly distinguish himself in any debate with his trademark of dispassionate, encyclopedic reasoning’.”

    Now you’re sounding creepy”.

    ************************************************************************

    Joel, you must not know his history, his quarter-century of publications, his achievements, (on the progressive values you usually support)…in fact, you haven’t attended any of Solomon’s local appearances or you would know that he is a knowledgeable and gifted orator.

    Nothing “creepy” about it.

    What’s creepy is that the only candidate with a life-long track record of effective progressive activism, media savvy, international and domestic organizational outreach…is being passed-over by so many “progressives” based upon the “pragmatic” assumption that average voters will not be able to relate to Solomon’s experiences. Therefore, to beat Huffman, we must support less-knowledgeable, less experienced, less accomplished, unknown candidates due to a liberal version of Joe-The-Plumber “likability”.

    That’s my conclusion after speaking with local Adams supporters, who have no clue what their candidate will actually do once in office.

  23. Anonymous
    November 23, 2011 at 1:12 pm

    Not A Native says:
    November 22, 2011 at 2:39 pm

    “Anon 1:17, sounds to me like you have some kind of axe to grind against some HCDCC members”.

    I agree with your other points, however, no axe is needed (nor does one exist) to call-out the HCDCC for attempting to take credit for “aggressive voter registration efforts” when they haven’t canvassed Eureka in living memory.

    And with our new District, registration will probably become less of a priority.

  24. Anonymous
    November 23, 2011 at 1:15 pm

    Cali is F’d for sure. These are the lib’s of the libs. Not a tax $$$$$ they don’t want and won’t spend destroying the republic. Yes dumb asses , it’s not a democracy.

  25. Eric Kirk
    November 23, 2011 at 2:11 pm

    They may have opposed the measure but the incumbents are enjoying the results.

    Are they? My understanding is that Loretta Sanchez, who defeated B-1 Bob Dornan some years ago and is perceived as a rising star in the party, is in trouble with her new demographics. There have been some dramatic changes, including ours. Which incumbent benefits in our district?

  26. Eric Kirk
    November 23, 2011 at 2:20 pm

    Yeah, HB, I think you’re on autopilot there. A simple Googling reveals that eight pairs of incumbents will be facing off against each other this time around – which means that at least eight incumbents will lose. These incumbents represent about a third of the California delegation.

    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0811/61950.html

    I haven’t read the whole article yet, but I bet that some of the incumbents facing off are in the same party.

    And it looks like the Republicans, for once, negotiated badly as they could lose three seats.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/post/incumbents-lose-democrats-win-with-california-redistricting-proposal/2011/06/10/AGYXoIPH_blog.html

  27. November 23, 2011 at 2:45 pm

    Has Solomon ever held elective office? At least Huffman held a seat in the CA Assembly and managed to pass a number of bipartisan bills. When I met Huffman, I was impressed by his knowledge of North Coast issues (Klamath dams, MLPA, and short sea shipping for a few). I have not yet met Mr. Solomon but hope to soon and will ask him the same sorts of questions. Yes, Huffman impressed me but I will withhold judgement until I meet more candidates.

  28. November 23, 2011 at 2:48 pm

    The reason I ask about previous office is that hot-shot cowboys riding in to revamp the system seldom gain much traction. Some one with at least a passing experience should have knowledge that can help them be as effective as possible under the circumstances. Is that effective enough? Probably not but we take what we can get. (cynical? Me? Awwww)

  29. Anonymous
    November 23, 2011 at 6:08 pm

    Not sure how many elected offices Barack Obama held but his life- long advocacy put him over the top.

    Too bad the Dems hadn’t elected enough progressives to support him.

  30. Eric Kirk
    November 23, 2011 at 7:25 pm

    Al Franken had never held office, and he’s doing a great job in my opinion.

    And before being elected governor, Ronald Reagan had never …., well… okay. Jesse Ventura had never….

    George Washington. He’d never held office!

    Nor Idi Amin.

  31. November 23, 2011 at 7:36 pm

    Does Norman Solomon really sound like a “hot-shot cowboy,” A-Nony-Mouse?

    And I agree with Eric Kirk that those who have never held office can do a great job.

  32. Jack Sherman
    November 23, 2011 at 8:29 pm

    None of the candidates have a significant track-record in office. I’ll vote for the life-long progressive without hesitation.

    Solomon has been one of the Left’s effective voices for 25 years, it’s pretty damned exciting that he’s running.

  33. High Finance
    November 24, 2011 at 1:03 pm

    Why waste your time & energy getting excited about any state race here ?

    The Democrat Party machine has already anointed the winner and all the rest is b/s. The Soviet Union had more open races than the Northcoast.

    Fred mentions that in his 37 years there has never been a Republican from our district in the state Senate or Assembly and that is true. In fact, the Democrats have held control of the entire state Senate & Assembly for more than that.

    And California is on the fast track to bankruptcy.

    This is not a coincidence.

    But Mouse says “Hell NO, we don’t want no cowboys coming in trying to revamp the system !!” He provides the perfect example of the average California voter and why there is no hope.

  34. Eric Kirk
    November 24, 2011 at 8:27 pm

    Blame the voters HF. They’re the people who put them in office.

  35. Plain Jane
    November 24, 2011 at 11:13 pm

    HiFi blames Democrats for the end result of Republican policies, i.e. tax cuts, prop 13, deregulation which allowed Enron’s looting and Arnold’s deal to take pennies on the dollar on the billions Enron stole from California. When the Republicans are in charge he blames recession. He is one of those fools who STILL believes the government forced banks to loan money to people who couldn’t afford it and that is what caused the great recession

  36. Anonymous
    November 25, 2011 at 7:54 am

    PJ, they stopped looking at the Enron deals when they found out CALPERS made a ton of money off it.

  37. Plain Jane
    November 25, 2011 at 7:58 am

    CalPers lost 11 million on Enron.

  38. Anonymous
    November 25, 2011 at 8:05 am

    Not on Jedi I.

    Made 125 million.

  39. Plain Jane
    November 25, 2011 at 8:10 am

    They made some here and lost some there but they had a net LOSS of 11 million. Google is your friend, it keeps you from making a fool out of yourself, or would if you had a regular ID.

  40. Anonymous
  41. Plain Jane
    November 25, 2011 at 8:57 am

    That’s an article about ONE Enron investment (JEDI) which they sold back to Enron in 1996, not about all of their Enron investments. Enron went bankrupt in 2001 and CalPers lost 11 million NET (wins minus losses).

    See Notable investments:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CalPERS

    Yes, it’s Wiki but the sources are all there.

  42. Anonymous
    November 25, 2011 at 9:52 am

    jane the point is they made $125,000,000 off enron. yes, they lost some in the stock deals, but their overall loss was offset by the hundred million gain they had in the first round – this was at a time when everybody was losing in the stock market – remember 9/11? had they not been part of the fraud, they would have lost much more – as in $125,000,000 more. there was talk of finding out who profited off enron and making them pay it back, but when it was the public employees, that talk stopped. go figure.

  43. Plain Jane
    November 25, 2011 at 10:10 am

    Except there is no evidence they were part of the fraud. They sold their shares (at Enron’s request) in JEDI back to Enron and reinvested their profits. If you have any legitimate source that determined CalPers was involved in the fraud, you’ll have to provide it because the investigations came to the opposite conclusion. You posted one link to a 2002 story about CalPers FIRST investment with Enron (JEDI) and there is no dispute that they made a lot of money on it in 1996. But those gains were offset by later loses and they ended up losing 11 million total. Your conclusion that deals were made because of CalPers is nothing but partisan BS, unless you think the Bush DOJ covered up for them.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2002/01/11/opinion/the-enron-investigations.html

  44. Anonymous
    November 25, 2011 at 12:02 pm

    pj, my point is they made $125,000,000 off a fraud company. they did not give the money back. how is this any different than what is going on with the investment bankers everybody is protesting about now?

    because of who got the money.

  45. Plain Jane
    November 25, 2011 at 12:13 pm

    CalPers isn’t investment bankers. They invested money with Enron “because everyone was” and which initially made them money because Enron wanted MORE money from them. They didn’t participate in any shady deals and were defrauded as well. Your smearing of a public employee pension plan only reveals how desperate you are to deflect blame from corrupt CEO’s, Cheney’s energy task force, Bush’s corrupt DOJ and Arnold’s involvement with Enron before he was even elected. If they hadn’t had a net LOSS you might have a case. Expecting them to repay money that they lost is ridiculous. The money ended up in someone’s pockets, but it wasn’t CalPers.

  46. Plain Jane
    November 25, 2011 at 12:20 pm

    Why don’t you contact the political recipients of Enron’s corruption and ask them to give the money back?

    “Enron spent big money in Washington. According to available records, Enron lavished near $5.8 million in political contributions on various candidates (Congresspersons, Senators, the President and Vice President) over the last decade, with almost seventy-five percent of it going to Republicans. Indeed, according to one report, Enron and its officials spent $2 million on George W. Bush’s political career alone, starting with his first (unsuccessful) run for Congress.”

    “On January 15, Time magazine ran a story entitled “For Enron, Washington May Have Been a Bad Investment.” The story concludes that Kenneth Lay & Company did not get much for their money, other than “[a] seat at the table for Dick Cheney’s energy-policy formulations – OK, six seats – and the grace of the Enron-friendly energy policy that resulted. Possibly veto power over the head of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission – former chief Curtis Hebert Jr. says Bush replaced him not long after Hebert declined Lay’s demand for a friendlier stance toward energy deregulation. And a very big black book. And that’s about it.”

    http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20020118.html

  47. High Finance
    November 25, 2011 at 4:32 pm

    Only a bitter partisan like PJ would try to make the Enron scandal a Republican issue.

    The Enron gang got their start when the Democrats controlled the White House and both house of congress. They continued all the way through the Clinton administration.

    It was the Bush administration, the Bush Justice Department that closed them down and sent a number of them to prison.

  48. Plain Jane
    November 25, 2011 at 5:03 pm

    “We will not take any action that makes California’s problems worse and that’s why I oppose price caps,” said Mr. Bush on May 29, 2001.” That and the millions that Enron donated to his political career. It was Bush who fired the head of FERC because he opposed the regulations Enron wanted and which Bush and Cheney both favored. Obviously the deregulation was done by Bush, not Clinton. When a company is founded is irrelevant to when they went corrupt.

  49. Anonymous
    November 25, 2011 at 7:43 pm

    Where did the $125,000,000 come from? What did Enron do to give them that money?

  50. Jack Sherman
    November 25, 2011 at 8:05 pm

    “Why waste your time & energy getting excited about any state race here” ?

    Take a look at Norman Solomon’s history.

    Finally, a life-long, effective, eloquent and knowledgeable activist for all the things that democrats claim to support…a far-cry from the typical corporate/democrat candidates that party leaders back, (that potential voters can’t distinguish from republicans), hence, the chronic non-participation rates.

    BTW, CA. Gov. Gray Davis initiated a $25 billion case against ENRON that Arnold Schwarzenegger settled for pennies on the dollar. ENRON was one of Schwarzenegger’s biggest donors.

  51. High Finance
    November 25, 2011 at 10:21 pm

    Enron gave $85.000 to Gray Davis.

    In fact, between 1989 to 1999 Enron gave over 1.5 MILLION dollars to Democrats with almost half of it between 1998-99.

    PJ, try getting facts before posting. You’re too easy to debunk.

  52. Anonymous
    November 25, 2011 at 10:26 pm

    Like HiFi’s facts about comparing today’s conditions to poverty “a few decades ago”. Oh wait, he didn’t have any facts for that comment, he just made it up.

  53. Plain Jane
    November 25, 2011 at 10:54 pm

    Only an idiot like HiFi would ignore the sourced fact that 75% of the over $5 million of all Enron donations went to Republicans with the vast majority to Bush (over $2 million) and Cheney who deregulated the industry for Enron’s benefit which allowed them to defraud investors and rob the State of California.

    Also please note that HiFi has ignored the well researched articles posted in Quick Notes about what and who caused the mortgage / economic crisis. He’s a Limbautomized fool.

  54. Anonymous
    November 25, 2011 at 11:02 pm

    “e’s a Limbautomized fool.”

    It’s from eating the processed crap at Marie Calendar’s…

  55. Vote Solomon In June
    November 26, 2011 at 12:11 am

    If we had a fair and balanced press, these facts would be common knowledge and this community’s “Hi-Spinners” would be forced to remain in their dark netherworld.

    Mainstream media offices should be included in the occupy-movement, their outrageous censorship is well-documented.

    Norman Solomon has played a huge role in outing this nation’s corrupt corporations and media. He takes zero corporate donations, which is another fact that distinguishes him from the usual corporate democrats that “party pragmatists” always back.

  56. High Finance
    November 26, 2011 at 12:23 pm

    PJ tries to make everything in life an “Us vs Them” issue and I showed, once again, that she was dead wrong. Her Amen Chorus chimes in without thought or reason.

    Enron was an equal opportunity crooked outfit. They contributed to Dems as well as Reps, they did not care. It was whoever was in power at the time. Dems took their money just as fast as the Reps did.

  57. We Are All One
    November 28, 2011 at 12:53 pm

    There’s no “Us and Them”!

    Look everyone, High-Hypocrite is suddenly angry about the ENRON debacle and corporate corruption! Next thing you know this screaming liberal will be taking a closer look at the bailouts and corporate personhood.

    Gray Davis sued ENRON DESPITE ENRON’s $85,000 donation.

    Arnold Schwarzenegger settled it for pennies BECAUSE of his $1.2 million from ENRON.

    No “Amen chorus” is needed to expel this much gas.

  58. High Finance
    November 28, 2011 at 6:16 pm

    Gray Davis also took $85,000 in campaign contributions from Enron.

  59. Plain Jane
    November 28, 2011 at 6:34 pm

    Davis filed suit against Enron despite their donation.
    Arnold took over a million from Enron and settled the suit for pennies on the dollar. Enron knew where the best deal was.

  60. We Are All One
    November 30, 2011 at 1:43 pm

    The truth has to be repeated many times before “Hi-Fi” concedes by disappearing into the next Heraldo report to begin his dimwitted provocations anew.

    Other than allowing his opponents to practicing the language of change, engaging this ignorant troll is boring, useless, predictable and quite sad.

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s