The Representative from Washington's Congressional District # 3 is an alleged member of the Democratic Party who has backed George Bush on matters of critical importance to U.S. citizens in general (and progressives in particular), for examples: 1) support for the occupation of Iraq, and, especially, support for 'the Surge'; 2) approval of the Peru Free-Trade Agreement in late 2007; and 3) an affirmative vote for the construction of 700 miles of fence/wall along the U.S. border with Mexico in 2006.

Consequently, I have been searching for a progressive opponent for Baird in the August primary election.  This is the story and result of that search.

(Posted earlier on OpenLeft and DemocracyInVancouver.)

Of course, this is premature; but it's worth consideration, if Obama wins the nomination. Her qualifications: knowledgeable, articulate, quick-witted, experienced, practical, potential longevity (good health, political viability in NY).

Disclosure: I support Obama for President.

I wrote a diary last week - Oil and the new Sunni alliance with the U.S. – and there are some interesting developments to this story for your consideration.

David Ignatius (WaPo) published an article yesterday in which one Ayad Allawi figures prominently. Ignatius, in true Beltway-insider form, quotes an "administration official" as stating that frustration with Iranian meddling has caused the U.S. occupation establishment to decide that al-Maliki is too much of an Iranian ally (whether consciously or objectively is not germane) and that new leadership is needed.  If you read my previous, related diary, then you know that I think that this is window-dressing for a decision to separate Iraq into two or three "states".

So the Sunni warlords/tribal chieftains/ex-Baathists/take-your-pick have decided to oppose the Al Qaeda gang in western Iraq and to cooperate with the U.S. forces.  Let us revisit the journey of one Dick Cheney to Saudi Arabia in May of this year.

At the time the CW was that Dick was being chastised by the house of Saud for the sectarian cleansing of Sunnis in Baghdad and other parts of Iraq.  Maybe ...

The federal government claims that inflation is low and fairly stable at present.  Do you believe that?  If inflation rises, this is supposed to be an indication that money is too available relative to the products, services, and property that are available for sale, so prices are bid up by eager buyers.  So the Federal Reserve System raises a key interest rate that starts a chain of interest rate increases, choking the money supply somewhat by making credit more expensive.  If credit is more expensive, businesses (and consumers) that depend on credit for expansion, or even for operation, (or for consumption) have to restrict purchases - and business in general starts to contract.  This contraction alleviates the pressure on prices, and the inflation rate stabilizes again.

What is a low inflation rate?  The FED seems to like 1 to 3% at the consumer level.  And nowadays, the federal government reports inflation rates that typically fall in or near that range.  My take is very different, and, from what I’ve read from other diarists here, this article should raise a hackle or two.  If you would like to discuss, please read on:

Australian Premier Finds That Kyoto Accords May Have Value; Our President (oh, the shame of it) Is – Once Again – All Alone In The World

I published this article in TheRagBlog last November (no copyright involved).  See what you think.  

Not to sound alarmist, but sound the alarm anyway, just in case – man-made CO2 and NOx and SO2 emissions may be bad for us. Big news, huh? Only problem is that this bad news is separate from: a) Global Warming, b) Acid Rain, and c) general considerations of breathing. Try ocean acidification.