View Story | 41 comments
Comments: Expand Shrink Hide (Always) | Indented Flat (Always)
his dad is the retiring incumbent!
John McCain, you are _not_ my friend.
by LarryInNYC on Sat Aug 19, 2006 at 05:37:00 PM PDT
[ Parent ]
his dad's casting votes on my behalf. I spend a lot less time writing cautionary letters to my Congresscritter than most Kossacks, I wager.
And Chris probably comes even closer to representing my views than Major does.
The only thing we have to fear is fear itself.
by sidnora on Sat Aug 19, 2006 at 05:39:52 PM PDT
by LarryInNYC on Sat Aug 19, 2006 at 05:53:51 PM PDT
The diary of mine Brooklynboy mentions states it up front. I know Brooklynboy and he is passionate about fighting for a better development plan for Brooklyn. So that is what his diary focuses on.
Read the PROGRESSIVE DEMOCRAT Newsletter
by mole333 on Sat Aug 19, 2006 at 06:02:24 PM PDT
Diaries are read individually. And when you say things like:
is the only true progressive candidate in the race-unencumbered by Brooklyn's corrupt Democratic political machine
and
Chris Owens is from the community and of the community.
and then your reader finds out that the candidate you're talking about is actually the son of the retiring, long-time incumbent you can wind up with a bit of egg on your face. It may harm your argument if people feel that you haven't been entirely straight with them. To your credit, you do make this clear whenever you diary about this race. From my point of view it doesn't incline me against Chris Owens at all, and I think the same would be true of many other people.
Why, by the way, isn't Chris Owen the party-backed candidate? That seems odd. Does he have his father's backing?
by LarryInNYC on Sat Aug 19, 2006 at 06:08:37 PM PDT
The Democratic Machine in Brooklyn is corrupt as can be. Chris is anti-machine. The machine candidate is Carl Andrews, who was the right hand man of the now imprisoned Clarence Norman and a major Hillary supporter. Yassky has ties with Schumer. Now neither Hillary nor Chuck have endorsed, but it would be hard for the party to go for Chris with the local machine going for Carl and with perceived potential support for Carl and David from the Senators. The party is wisely staying far away from backing anyone in this race. He does have his father's backing as well as the backing of a whole slew of Congressmen. By far the candidate with the strongest CONGRESSIONAL support is Chris--Bernie Sanders, Dennis Kucinich, Maxine Waters, John Conyers, and a whole bunch of others. Progressive Democratic Congressmen want Chris.
I really think Chris IS the progressive candiate (as his long list of progressive organizations indicates) and he does stand with the community. Those are true statements. The fact that he is is father's son doesn't change that any more than the fact that his brother was on the Cosby show. Chris really rocks and I would lay money (well, not really...I don't have the money to bet) that you would like him as well if you got to know him.
by mole333 on Sat Aug 19, 2006 at 06:17:27 PM PDT
had parents who were politicians.
Kendrick Meek, Harold Ford, Chris Dodd, Evan Bayh, Lisa Murkowski, Rodney Frelinghuysen, Dan Boren, Mark Pryor, Lucille Roybal, Bob Bennett, Mary Landrieu, Ted Kennedy, Charles Bass, Alan Mollohan, ...
Join the College Kossacks on Facebook. Hat Thief
by DemocraticLuntz on Sat Aug 19, 2006 at 05:47:13 PM PDT
a problem with that. But lots of other people do -- and I have a sneaking suspicion that some of the people who support Chris Owen (specifically not including the people who post prominently here in his support) consider it a violation of human decency for Hillary Clinton, for instance, to aspire to the office of President.
In particular, I couldn't let the original "of the PEOPLE, by THE people, AND FOR the PEOPLE" comment go without remarking on it.
by LarryInNYC on Sat Aug 19, 2006 at 05:56:08 PM PDT
the "of the people" would make more sense. Chris' biggest campaign strength is his large and enthusiastic corps of volunteers, truly a grass-roots phenomenon, and drawn from all across the progressive spectrum of Brooklyn politics; Andrews' strength is the (corrupt) Brooklyn machine, Clarke's comes out of her ethnic community, and Yassky's is, well, money from developers.
by sidnora on Sun Aug 20, 2006 at 04:30:39 AM PDT
by davybaby on Sat Aug 19, 2006 at 09:19:08 PM PDT
I like Major. He is one of those rare Democrats who voted AGAINST the Patriot Act and the Iraq war at every chance.
But he has been in too long.
I don't support Chris because of his name. In fact I was a Yassky man at the start of this. It was only after I heard Chris and got to know him that I became convinced he was the right person for the job. I still like Yassky, though he has done and said some things that have soured me a little on him. But Chris is so much better than any of the other candidates.
I judge him for himself and he comes out superb.
by mole333 on Sat Aug 19, 2006 at 05:53:42 PM PDT
I know about Yassky is this article I read in Edible Brooklyn, a free Brooklyn food magazine I picked up when I took my car to the mechanic in Williamsburg last week. He certainly seemed to be up on food issues! Also, he seems like a nice guy in that he's gone into public service instead of big money law, where someone with his credentials could have done well.
by LarryInNYC on Sat Aug 19, 2006 at 05:58:02 PM PDT
I have known Yassky longer than I have known Chris and I supported his run for City Council. Yassky courted the support of my wife and me fairly aggressively for awhile. I think Yassky's heart is in the right place. But, I think he lets his ego get in the way. He is so convinced he is right that he sometimes overlooks why he is wrong.
Mainly I just plain like Chris better. A diary I wrote for the Daily Gotham sometime back (which was praised by BOTH Chris and Yassky) compares them. I need to update that and maybe post it here. I think it captures them pretty well. Sadly, I have soured more on Yassky since then. He endorsed the most corrupt candidate for Brooklyn DA last year (the Clarence Norman supporter, Sampson), he has expressed some support for Bush bombing Iran, he told an opponant of DRE voting machines that he "didn't care" about the issue, and he has sponsored a bill that would use $3 million of city money to fund a jobs program that Ratner had promised to fund, thus bailing Ratner out of one of his promises. And, just before he sponsored that bill, he was endorsed by a pro-Ratner organization. It smelled too much like a dirty deal. No single one of those would be a deal breaker for me. But put together it is starts to be hard for me to like him. Meanwhile, Chris impresses me each time I discuss an issue with him.
by mole333 on Sat Aug 19, 2006 at 06:10:05 PM PDT
wide narrow
View Story | 41 comments