This past Sunday afternoon, a contingent of Southern California Kossacks decided to attend Rep. Brad Sherman's town hall meeting to ask him why his signature did not appear on either of John Conyers' recent letters to Bush (May 5th, regarding the DSM; May 12, requesting a Special Counsel regarding torture).
Suffice it to say that, after a mind-numbing hour of placque-awarding and "ain't-it-great-to-be-gettin-federal-money' self-fellating by country supervisors over the $100 million Sherman kicked into the Cross-Valley busway, the only real revelation in the entire meeting occurred as a result of my question.
See for yourself here. (Sorry, Quicktime only.)
I don't want to spoil the "punchline" of the whole event, except to say that in times like these, it is unfathomable to me that House Democrats could be so utterly disconnected from one another and so utterly ignorant of important political matters.
Truly sad. A wake up call to all of us, I hope.
BTW, I'm sending this to John Conyers to help fact-check what Sherman said on camera.
UPDATE: AS REQUESTED, a transcript of the video clip for those who can't play QT video:
Matt Moriarty: I'd like to thank you on a stellar voting record on the bread and butter issues that Democrats have and I'd also like to thank you for holding these meetings. And my question is about a couple of signatures. On May 5th, Congressman John Conyers and 88 other House Democrats sent a letter to President Bush, requesting answers on the most basic questions surrounding the release of the so-called "Downing Street Memo..."
[APPLAUSE]
MM: ...contains the minutes of a private meeting between Tony Blair and his national security staff. Although the memo is dated July 23rd, 2002 - eight months before the Iraq war began, three months before Congress authorized the war and one month before Donald Rumsfeld flatly stated that Bush had "made no such determination to go to war" - the memo shows that Blair was told that "war was inevitable" and that American "facts and intelligence were being fixed around the policy."
[Sherman looks at me like I'm from another planet]
MM: And you're... I'm surprised you haven't heard of this... To date...
Brad Sherman: I've certainly heard charges in Britain that that is the case. But this particular memo I haven't heard of and, frankly, this letter by John Conyers I haven't heard of...
AUDIENCE: [audible gasps] [What??]
MM: Okay, that was my question. Your... Your signature did not appear on that letter. It is possible that you were missed because it did go around informally. There was another letter that John Conyers wrote, however, that got the signatures of 51 House Democrats, asking for Alberto Gonzales to appoint a special counsel to look into the problem of torture. That went out as a "dear colleage" which means that you did get it. And, again, your signature is not on it. So my question is...
[Sherman tries to wave me off]
MM: I do have a minute, right? My question is, given the fact that a lot of us out here feel that John Conyers is becoming quite a giant in our party, is becoming...
[APPLAUSE]
MM: ...the point man on a lot of issues. On Iraq, on election reform, on corporate accountability, on torture. He's precisely the kind of guy we would want our representative to support. So I'd like to ask...
[APPLAUSE]
MM: ...you to explain the absence of your signatures on those letters and also pledge to support him in his future efforts to get some kind of accountability from this administration.
[APPLAUSE]
BS: I work very closely with John Conyers. I get, it must be, every week, maybe three or four hundred "dear colleagues," maybe five or six hundred, and I'm not sure that we're able to focus on every one of them. Since I talk to John at least five times a week, I'll tell you that he didn't mention either of those directly to me.
MM: I talk to John on dailyKos about five times a week.
BS: You talk to John what?
MM: John Conyers is a regular poster...
AUDIENCE MEMBER: Next person!!
BS: Okay, look...
MM: [to Audience Guy] He gets to decide that!
BS: Okay... The gentleman is right. I do have to limit to you to a question. I don't know how you talk to John every week...
MM: Will you pledge to be in contact with him on future memos?
BS: I will talk to John, as I say, three, four, five times a week, on the floor. I work very closely with him. As a matter of fact, one of the reasons you know about John Conyers' efforts is I'm the advisor to the Caucus on getting the message out by mail and by email. So, you may know about his stuff because I'm the guy that talked to him about his technology to get it out there...
MM: He posts on our blog every day, along with Barbara Boxer, Jon Corzine, Jim McDermott...
BS: As a matter of fact, he just stole my techincal communications staffer. With good reason. He's got a much bigger staff than I have...
MM: He's used it very well, is my point!
BS: He is obviously using technology very well. He's going to use it better because he's taken John Gottfried from my office. In large part because John has about four times the staff that I do and he's able to afford John. Or to afford to pay John what John would like to make. So, you're going to hear a lot more, especially through email, from John Conyers and you're probably going to be asking more questions, so I better talk to John more often on the floor. Or, more directly on the floor.